SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND
WATER COMMITTEE WILL COME TO
ORDER, IF OBVIOUSLY, WE DON'T
HAVE A QUORUM. BUT IF MEMBERS
COULD COME DOWN TO ROOM 2100 SO
WE CAN ESTABLISH QUORUM FOR OUR
HEARING, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. WE
HAVE 11 BILLS ON TODAY'S AGENDA,
THREE OF WHICH ARE PROPOSED FOR
CONSENT AND BILLS WILL BE HEARD
IN THE ORDER IN WHICH AUTHORS
COME HERE. AND IF THAT'S IN FILE
ORDER, THAT'D BE GREAT, BUT
SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM AT
THIS POINT, I WILL, PROCEED AS A
SUBCOMMITTEE AND WILL ESTABLISH
A QUORUM WHEN SUFFICIENT MEMBERS
ARE PRESENT, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE
FIRST AUTHOR, WHICH IS GOING TO
BE ME, PRESENTING FILE ITEM
NUMBER 11, SB 1402. AND I'M
SORRY, WE HAVE SENATOR DODD HERE
WHO CAN PRESENT FILE ITEM
NUMBER. LET'S SEE. FILE ITEM
NUMBER THREE, SB 1159. JUST JUST
FOR THE RECORD, MR. CHAIR,
YOU'RE NOT SORRY THAT MR. DODD
IS HERE. I'M KIND OF SORRY
YOU'RE HERE. OKAY. JUST CHECKING
. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING.
THANK YOU. MR. SENATOR FROM NAPA
MAY PROCEED WHEN WE'RE VERY
HAPPY YOU'RE HERE, SIR. OKAY MR.
CHAIR, MEMBERS, TODAY I'M
PRESENTING SB 1159 REGARDING
ROADSIDE WILDFIRE RISK
REDUCTION. I'LL START BY
ACCEPTING THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND THANKING THE
CHAIR AND THE COMMITTEE STAFF
FOR WORKING WITH US ON THIS,
WITH THESE AMENDMENTS, THE BILL
REQUIRES THAT BY JANUARY 1ST,
2026, THE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND
RESEARCH AND CONSULTATION WITH
THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS
EVALUATES A CATEGORICAL
EXEMPTION FOR ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
THAT REDUCE WILDFIRE RISK AND
MEET APPROPRIATE CONDITIONS,
WHICH THE SECRETARY OF NATURAL
RESOURCES MUST CONSIDER. SB 1159
DOES NOT CREATE A STATUTORY
EXEMPTION THÀNH. RATHER, IT
STATES THAT THE ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT IS A
LEGISLATIVE PRIORITY AND THAT
PROJECTS UNDERTAKING ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT MEETING
APPROPRIATE SAFEGUARDS SHOULD BE
CONSIDERED FOR INCLUSION ON THE
LIST OF CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
PROJECTS. OPR AND THE SECRETARY
HAVE ALREADY HAVE A HISTORY OF
EVALUATING AND APPROPRIATING,
EXCUSE ME APPROPRIATELY,
TAILORING CATEGORICAL
EXEMPTIONS. ROADSIDE IGNITIONS
ARE A SIGNIFICANT SOURCE OF
WILDFIRES. WHEN A SPARK FROM A
PASSING VEHICLE OR CIGARET COMES
INTO CONTACT WITH DRY BRUSH AND
GRASS, WITH THOUSANDS OF MILES
OF ROADS IN WILDFIRE PRONE
LANDS, THE RISK OF ROADSIDE
VEGETATION OAN LACK OF
MANAGEMENT IS CONSTANTLY, A
CONCERN FOR UNCONTROLLED
WILDFIRE. THE CURRENTLY ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
ARE OFTEN SUBJECT TO SEQUA
REVIEWS THAT CAN ADD COSTS AND
DELAYS, ULTIMATELY REDUCING THE
AMOUNT OF WORK THAT GETS DONE,
INCREASING THE RISK OF RUNAWAY
FIRES THAT ARE DEVASTATING TO
CLIMATE CHANGE, AS WELL AS HUMAN
AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH. AN
EXEMPTION FOR ROADSIDE
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PROJECTS
WOULD VASTLY INCREASE THE AMOUNT
OF ROADSIDE VEGETATION
MANAGEMENT WORK THAT CAN BE
COMPLETED IN A GIVEN AMOUNT OF
TIME. THE BILL IS SUPPORTED BY
THE CALIFORNIA FIRE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. CBIA NÚMERO
COUNTIES AND OTHER
ORGANIZATIONS. AND WITH ME TODAY
IS FIRE CHIEF DAVE WINOKUR,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
WILDFIRE, THE CALIFORNIA FIRE
CHIEFS ASSOCIATION. DO YOU JUST
HAVE ONE WITNESS, SENATOR? YES,
SIR. ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVE UP TO
FOUR MINUTES IF YOU'D LIKE TO
USE THAT. THANK YOU. YOU MAY
PROCEED. THANK YOU, SIR DAVE
WINOKUR, REPRESENTING THE
CALIFORNIA FIRE CHIEFS
ASSOCIATION. THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SHARE OUR
THOUGHTS TODAY. AND THANK YOU
FOR SENATOR DODD FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD, RECOGNIZING
THAT MOST OF CALIFORNIA IS A
FIRE DEPENDENT LANDSCAPE WHERE
FIRES ARE A FEATURE, NOT A BUG,
AND WE HAVE NO FUTURE THAT DOES
NOT INCLUDE RECURRING AND
REGULAR FIRE OCCURRENCE AS WELL
AS CLIMATE CHANGE COMPACTION TO
THE WEATHER CYCLE. THAT WILL
MEAN EXPOSURE TO AN INCREASED
NUMBER OF DAYS THAT ARE CAPABLE
OF SUPPORTING RAPIDLY SPREADING
DESTRUCTIVE WILDFIRES. IN THE
FACE OF THAT REALITY, COMBINED
WITH THE MANY HOMES THAT HAVE
BEEN BUILT IN THE WILDLAND URBAN
INTERFACE, AND THE DEGREE TO
WHICH OUR FIREFIGHTING RESOURCES
ARE ALREADY STRETCHED VERY THIN
ON HIGH THREAT DAYS, WE THINK IT
IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT
CONDITIONS ARE SET TO ENABLE
MICRO PROJECTS ACROSS THE
LANDSCAPE WHERE SEQUA, WHICH IS
A COMPLEX AND DAUNTING TASK OR,
BAR TO OVERCOME FOR LOCAL
GOVERNMENTS ATTEMPTING TO CARRY
MICRO PROJECTS, CREATING MORE
CERTAINTY AROUND EXEMPTIONS FROM
SEQUA FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ACHIEVING WILDFIRE SAFETY ON
ROADSIDES WHERE WORK DONE TO THE
VEGETATION THAT SURROUNDS THE
ROADSIDE NOT ONLY IS ABLE TO
LEVERAGE THE NON-BURNABLE
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ROAD THAT
IS ALREADY THERE, WE GET DUAL
BENEFITS OF COMPARTMENTALIZING
WILDFIRE AND SECURING OUR
EVACUATION ROUTES SO THAT WHEN
TIMES COME THAT WE HAVE TO
EVACUATE COMMUNITIES, IT IS LESS
LIKELY THAT THOSE ROADS WILL BE
DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY FIRE AND
DIRECT FLAME IMPINGEMENT.
CLOSING THE ROAD. WE THINK THE
CERTAINTY THAT THE BILL WOULD
PROVIDE WOULD BE GREATLY
BENEFICIAL AS FAR AS ENABLING
COMMUNITIES AND SMALL PROJECTS
TO MOVE FORWARD SO THAT AS WE
ENTER A RESOURCE CONSTRAINED
FUTURE WHERE THE PREVALENCE OF
STATE FUNDING FOR MEGA PROJECTS
IS LESS AVAILABLE, MORE OF THESE
LOCALLY RESOURCED, SMALLER SCALE
PROJECTS WILL BE ABLE TO PROCEED
WITH LESS REGULATORY OVERSIGHT.
WE'RE GREATLY APPRECIATIVE OF
THE OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THIS
FORWARD, AND WE BELIEVE THAT
THIS WILL ENSHRINE MANY OF THE
PRACTICES THAT ARE CURRENTLY
BUBBLING UP IN AN ORGANIC
MANNER, MAKING THEM MORE
ACCESSIBLE TO ADDITIONAL
COMMUNITIES. THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TESTIMONY, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES WHO WANT TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT? IF YOU COULD LIMIT YOUR
TESTIMONY TO YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE? YES. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIR. CHRIS MCCAULEY, ON BEHALF
OF HUMBOLDT REDWOOD COMPANY AND
MENDOCINO REDWOOD COMPANY IN
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU,
SIR. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.
SILVIO FERRARI, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, NOEL KRAMER
WITH WINE INSTITUTE IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. MONNING GEOFF NEAL,
REPRESENTING CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
AND YOLO COUNTY, BOTH IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MR. CHAIR. DYLAN ELLIOTT, ON
BEHALF OF THE COUNTIES OF NAPA
AND SONOMA, BOTH IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ALEX
LIMMER ON BEHALF OF PACIFIC
FOREST TRUST AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU, RICHARD MAHER WITH AMERICA
FIRST POLICY, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU, JULIE
LASZEWSKI, ON BEHALF OF EAST BAY
REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT, IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIR. JOE ZANZI
WITH SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC
IN SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU
. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND
MEMBERS. JAMES THÀNH, DIRECTOR
OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE COUNCIL
OF LABORERS IN SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. SEEING NO OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, DO WE HAVE
ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES, ANY
LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESSES, ANY
OPPOSITION WITNESSES AT ALL? ALL
RIGHT. SEEING NOBODY IN THE
ROOM, I WILL BRING THE
DISCUSSION BACK TO MEMBERS. DO
WE OUR MEMBERS, HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SENATOR
LAIRD, I JUST HAVE A BRIEF
COMMENT. I JUST WANT TO SALUTE
YOU BECAUSE, JUST THROUGH A
WHOLE SERIES OF ITERATIONS,
YOU'VE WORKED REALLY HARD ON
FIRE PREVENTION AND DIFFERENT
WAYS TO MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS. I
APPRECIATE TAKING THE AMENDMENTS
AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME. I WILL
BE HAPPY TO MOVE THE BILL. THANK
YOU. SENATOR THANK YOU, SENATOR,
SENATOR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I VOTE
THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO, WE HAVE A
SUBCOMMITTEE RIGHT NOW. WE'LL
TAKE THE VOTE UP AT THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR PRESENTATION, I THINK WE
HAVE SENATOR NIELLO IN THE ROOM.
SENATOR. HERE TO PRESENT FILE
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, SB 1185. YOU
CAN PROCEED WHENEVER YOU'RE
READY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND
MEMBERS, I'M PLEASED TO
INTRODUCE SB 1185, WHICH ADDS
FLEXIBILITY FOR WATER AGENCIES
TO COMPLY WITH STRINGENT
REGULATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY
BEING DRAFTED BY THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD. I'D
LIKE TO STATE THAT WHILE I
APPRECIATE THE, COMMITTEE'S
SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS, I REALLY
CAN'T ACCEPT THEM BECAUSE THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS REALLY DON'T
PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT I
THINK IS NECESSARY FOR WATER
AGENCIES, NOR WOULD THEY IN ANY
WAY SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE
REGULATIONS. I INTRODUCED 1185
AFTER THE LEDGE ANALYST'S OFFICE
PRODUCED A THOROUGH REPORT ON
THE COST AND POTENTIAL
UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF
STRINGENT REGULATIONS THAT ARE
CURRENTLY BEING PROPOSED BY THE
WATER BOARD. SB 1185 IMPLEMENTS
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE LAO AND
THE PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF
CALIFORNIA'S WATER POLICY
CENTER, CENTER THAT SEEKS TO
REDUCE COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING
CONSERVATION REQUIREMENTS. CGRTS
THE PUBLIC PUBLIC POLICY
INSTITUTE'S WATER POLICY CENTER,
FOUND THAT IT IS BOTH HARD AND
COSTLY FOR COMMUNITIES TO GO
BEYOND THE 20% SAVINGS, AND THAT
CAPPING REDUCTIONS AT THAT LEVEL
WOULD BRING AVERAGE COMPLIANCE
COMPLIANCE COSTS DOWN
SIGNIFICANTLY. SB 1185
IMPLEMENTS THIS VERY
RECOMMENDATION. IT'S WORTHWHILE
TO NOTE THAT PRIOR TO 2020,
CALIFORNIA CREATED A STATEWIDE
PER CAPITA URBAN WATER USE
REDUCTION OF 20% BY 2020.
CALIFORNIA SURPASSED THE 20%
REDUCTION AND REDUCED PER CAPITA
WATER URBAN WATER USE BY FULLY
32% BY 2020, WHILE FURTHER
CONSERVATION CERTAINLY IS A
LAUDABLE GOAL, THE REMAINING
WATER THAT IS AVAILABLE TO
CONSERVE COMES AT A MUCH HIGHER
PRICE BECAUSE MANY OF THE LOW
COST OPTIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN
IMPLEMENTED. THE WATER BOARD
ESTIMATES THE PROPOSED
REGULATIONS ARE THE. THE
PROPOSED REGULATIONS ARE
ESTIMATED TO SAVE 500,000 ACRE
FEET OF WATER, WHICH IS ONLY
ABOUT 1% OF THE STATE'S ANNUAL
WATER USE. THEY ALSO ESTIMATE,
IMPORTANTLY, THEIR REGULATIONS
HAVE A NET BENEFIT OF $2.2
BILLION FOR A BENEFIT COST RATIO
OF 1.2 FOR, HOWEVER, AND VERY
IMPORTANTLY, AN ANALYSIS BY AN
INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT, M-CUBED,
CONTRACTED BY BY AN INDIVIDUAL
WATER DISTRICT, MESA WATER
DISTRICT, DETERMINED THAT THE
BENEFIT COST RATIO TO BE 0.53,
MEANING THE COST WILL BE ALMOST
TWICE THE BENEFIT FOR A MERE 1%
OF WATER SAVINGS. SB 1185
STRIKES THE BALANCE FOR
MAINTAINING CONSERVATION
TARGETS, WHILE RECOGNIZING THAT
WHEN IT COMES TO CONSERVING
WATER, THERE IS A THRESHOLD OF
DIMINISHING RETURNS WHERE THE
BENEFIT OF THE REGULATION DOES
NOT OUTWEIGH THE COST BEING
IMPOSED TO THE GOALS OF A COST
THAT WILL BE BORNE BY RATEPAYERS
, AND A COST THAT BOTH THE LAO
AND THE PIC SAY WILL IMPACT
INLAND AND LOWER INCOME
COMMUNITIES DISPROPORTIONATELY.
WHILE THE REGULATIONS WERE
RECENTLY REVISED AND MAKES SOME
MODEST CHANGES, IT IS CLEAR THAT
THE REGULATIONS STILL GO FURTHER
THAN THE LAW REQUIRES. AND EVEN
BEYOND THAT, WHAT THE DEPARTMENT
OF WATER RESOURCES RECOMMENDS.
IN FACT, JUST THIS MONTH, THE
METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT
ANNOUNCED RATE AND PROPERTY TAX
INCREASES OVER THE NEXT TWO
YEARS. THEIR PRESS RELEASE CITED
BOTH LOWER WATER SALES AND
FUNDING FOR CONSERVATION
PROGRAMS, AMONG OTHERS, AS THE
BASIS FOR THEIR INCREASE. SB
1185 WILL IMPLEMENT THE LAWS
RECOMMENDED THÀNH TO SIMPLIFY
THE PROCESS AND ELIMINATE THE
THRESHOLDS TO ALLOW FOR UNIQUE
VARIANCES. A VARIANCE ALLOWS
WATER AGENCIES MORE FLEXIBILITY
TO USE WATER FOR UNIQUE USES,
SUCH AS EVAPORATIVE COOLERS IN
HOT REGIONS AND OF THE STATE AND
WATER FOR LIVESTOCK. SB 1185
ADDS ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY IN
MEETING WATER CONSERVATION GOALS
BY STATING THAT THE WATER LOSS
STANDARD DOES NOT HAVE TO BE MET
BY A STANDALONE REQUIREMENT, BUT
AS PART OF THE AGGREGATE OF THE
STANDARDS OF THE WATER USE
BUDGET. THE BILL ALSO IMPLEMENTS
THE LAWS RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW
WATER SUPPLIERS TO USE THE WATER
BOARD'S WATER USE TOOL, ESTIMATE
CGRTS FOR CALCULATING THEIR
WATER USE OBJECTIVE. THIS OPTION
WILL SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCE THE
AMOUNT OF WORK FOR THE SUPPLIER,
PARTICULARLY SMALL SUPPLIERS.
LAST, THE BILL PROHIBITS THE
WATER BOARD FROM ADOPTING
OUTDOOR WATER USE STANDARDS THAT
ARE MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN A
RECOMMENDED STANDARD FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES.
THE CURRENT PROPOSED REGULATIONS
WILL MANDATE OUTDOOR
CONSERVATION STANDARDS MUCH MORE
STRINGENT THAN DWR RECOMMENDED.
THESE OUTDOOR STANDARDS WILL BE
MAJOR COST HURDLES, ESPECIALLY
FOR INLAND AND ARID REGIONS OF
THE STATE. I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS A
QUESTION THAT WAS RAISED IN THE
ANALYSIS THAT THIS BILL MAY BE
PREMATURE, BECAUSE THE DRAFTING
OF REGULATIONS IS CURRENTLY
ONGOING AT THE WATER BOARD, BUT
THE LEGISLATURE HAS A CRITICAL
OVERSIGHT ROLE FOR THE STATE
WATER BOARD, AND IT WILL BECOME
MUCH HARDER TO MAKE CHANGES ONCE
THE REGULATIONS ARE ADOPTED. AND
IN EFFECT, THE SOONER THE
LEGISLATURE IS COGNIZANT OF THE
COSTLY IMPOSITIONS ON WATER
SUPPLIERS AND OUR CONSTITUENTS,
WHO WILL PAY HIGHER UTILITY
BILLS, THE SOONER WE CAN COURSE
CORRECT. WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO
INVITE SONIA PATEK WITH THE
LEDGE ANALYST'S OFFICE TO
DISCUSS THEIR FINDINGS OF THE
REPORT. THANK YOU. IS THIS YOUR
ONLY WITNESS, SENATOR? YES. YOU
HAVE UP TO FOUR MINUTES. YOU CAN
PROCEED WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
OH, OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
TRIED TO LIMIT MY COMMENTS TO
TWO MINUTES, SO I DON'T HAVE TO.
EFFICIENCY IS ALWAYS GREAT TO.
OKAY, I'M SONIA PATEK WITH THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST'S OFFICE.
I'D START BY NOTING THAT OUR
OFFICE DOES NOT TAKE POSITIONS
ON POLICY BILLS. SO I'M I'M HERE
NEITHER IN SUPPORT OF NOR IN
OPPOSITION TO SB 1185. AND
RATHER, I WILL PRESENT FINDINGS
FROM A REPORT WE RELEASED IN
JANUARY ON A SIMILAR TOPIC AND
ANSWER ANY RELATED TECHNICAL
QUESTIONS. SB 606 OF 2018
REQUIRED OUR OFFICE TO ASSESS
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE URBAN
WATER USE EFFICIENCY FRAMEWORK.
REGULATIONS WERE NOT FINALIZED
BY THE TIME OUR REPORT WAS DUE,
BUT WE WERE ABLE TO REVIEW THE
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL
BOARD'S PROPOSED REGULATIONS
FROM LAST AUGUST AND OF NOTE,
SINCE OUR REPORT CAME OUT, THE
STATE WATER BOARD HAS RELEASED
REVISED REGULATIONS SINCE SB 606
DIRECTED US TO DESCRIBE FACTORS,
FACILITATE OR IMPEDING
COMPLIANCE BY LOCAL WATER
SUPPLIERS, WE CONSIDERED THE
FEASIBILITY OF THE FRAMEWORK. WE
ALSO LOOKED AT COST
EFFECTIVENESS AND EQUITY. WE
FOUND THAT THE REGULATIONS, AS
PROPOSED IN AUGUST, WERE OVERLY
COMPLICATED OR STRINGENT IN
PLACES, ESPECIALLY WHEN IT CAME
TO PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR
COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS. THE
VARIANCE APPLICATION PROCESS AND
THE RESIDENTIAL OUTDOOR WATER
USE STANDARD. WE FOUND THAT
REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE
CHALLENGING AND COSTLY TO
IMPLEMENT, PARTICULARLY IN THE
NEAR TERME, EVEN IF THE LONG
TERME BENEFITS ULTIMATELY
OUTWEIGHED THE COSTS, AND THAT
THESE COSTS WOULD LIKELY BE FELT
DISPROPORTIONATELY BY LOWER
INCOME CUSTOMERS. WE RECOMMENDED
THE LEGISLATURE CONSIDER
REQUIRING THE ADMINISTRATION TO
ONE SIMPLIFY CERTAIN
REQUIREMENTS, SUCH AS
PERFORMANCE MEASURES. THE
VARIANCE APPLICATION PROCESS,
AND, FOR EXAMPLE, BY ALLOWING
THE BY ALLOWING LOCAL SUPPLIERS
TO USE THE WATER BOARD'S ONLINE
TOOL TO DEVELOP THEIR WATER USE
OBJECTIVES. NUMBER TWO EASE SOME
OF THE PROPOSED STANDARDS, SUCH
AS THE OUTDOOR WATER USE
STANDARD NUMBER THREE PROVIDE
MORE ROBUST TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
TO SUPPLIERS AND FOR EXTEND SOME
OF THE SUPPLIER DEADLINES. WE
ALSO SUGGESTED THE LEGISLATURE
CONSIDER HOW TO TARGET STATE
FUNDING WHEN AVAILABLE TO ASSIST
LOWER INCOME CUSTOMERS, AND
FINALLY TO INCREASE DROUGHT
RESILIENCE. WE RECOMMENDED
DEVELOPING A STRATEGY TO MANAGE
AND TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ANY WATER
SAVED AS A RESULT OF THE
FRAMEWORK. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL, SEEING
NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION? ANY LEAD
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION TO THIS
BILL, DO WE HAVE 1 OR 2? TWO?
OKAY. YOU HAVE TWO MINUTES EACH,
AND YOU CAN PROCEED WHENEVER
YOU'RE READY. THANK YOU,
CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS CODY
PHILLIPS WITH CALIFORNIA
COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE. WE'RE
OPPOSED TO THIS BILL BECAUSE IT
GREATLY UNDERMINES THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
CONSERVATION REGULATIONS. AND IT
DOES SO WITHOUT REALLY
RECOGNIZING THE PROGRESS THAT'S
BEEN MADE IN THE SUBSEQUENT
DRAFTS OF THE REGULATIONS SINCE
THE LÀ Þ REPORT WAS MADE, IT
DOES SO IN FOUR WAYS. FIRST,
JUST BY REMOVING THAT WATER LOSS
, COMPONENT, WHICH IT COMPLETELY
REMOVES. I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE,
THE INTENT DIFFERS. THERE BUT
THIS IS A REALLY MAJOR COMPONENT
OF THE BUDGET, ON AVERAGE, THIS
ANNUAL LOSS IS ABOUT 316,000
ACRE FEET PER YEAR. FOR CONTEXT,
IT TAKES ABOUT 2 TO 3 ACRE FEET
OF WATER TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF,
SORRY, IT TAKES ONE ACRE FOOT OF
WATER TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF 2 TO
3 FAMILIES PER YEAR. SO THIS IS
A SIGNIFICANT LOSS. AND THE
WHOLE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO
REALLY FOCUS ON THAT LEAKAGE,
WHICH IS SOMETHING WATER
SUPPLIERS SHOULD DEFINITELY BE
DOING BY CAPPING TOTAL
REDUCTIONS AT NO MORE THAN 20,
IT REALLY LIMITS THE NUANCE AND
CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE KIND OF
HAPPENED HERE. AND ALSO THE
SPECIFICITY OF THESE REDUCTIONS,
UNLIKE THE REDUCTION OF 20% BY
2020, THESE REGULATIONS ARE
REALLY WATER SUPPLIER SPECIFIC,
AND MANY WATER SUPPLIERS DON'T
HAVE TO CONSERVE ANY NEW WATER
FOR AT LEAST A DECADE UNDER THE
MOST RECENT DRAFT OF THE
REGULATIONS. SO THOSE THAT HAVE
SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS, LIKE
BEVERLY HILLS, OFTEN HAVEN'T
INVESTED IN CONSERVATION, SO
THEY'RE ALSO IGNORES THE FACT
THAT THERE IS ALTERNATIVE
COMPLIANCE PATHWAYS AND QUITE A
BIT OF FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN TO
HELP THOSE SUPPLIERS WHO HAVE
SIGNIFICANT SAVINGS ACHIEVE
THOSE GOALS WITHIN A REASONABLE
TIME FRAME, IT ALSO PROHIBITS
THE STATE WATER BOARD FROM USING
ANY RECOMMENDATION OUTSIDE OF
DWR'S, WHICH THIS HAS BEEN THE
MAIN TOPIC OF DEBATE AT THE
STATE WATER BOARD. THERE'S BEEN
A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH ON IT
FOR EXAMPLE, THE NEW LATEST
DRAFTS, WHICH ONCE AGAIN ARE NOT
FINALIZED, MOVE DWR'S
RECOMMENDATION BACK BY FIVE
YEARS, GIVING SUPPLIERS MORE
TIME TO DO IT, BUT ALSO ADDING A
MORE STRINGENT FINAL COMPLIANCE
DEADLINE BY 2040. THAT'S A HUGE
COMPROMISE THAT REALLY THAT KIND
OF CONVERSATION WOULD GO AWAY
UNDER THIS BILL. AND FINALLY, IT
PROHIBITS, OR THRESHOLDS FOR
VARIANCES AND ESSENTIALLY
CHANGES THE BURDEN OF PROOF.
THIS IS A HUGE DEAL. YES I'LL
JUST SAY THAT THESE CHANGES ARE
INAPPROPRIATE AT THESE TIME,
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HI, DENNIS
O'CONNOR WITH THIS, MONO LAKE
COMMITTEE. I'M NOT GOING TO
REPEAT ANYTHING, THAT MY
COLLEAGUE JUST MENTIONED. I JUST
WANT TO POINT OUT THAT, THE
LOGIC OF THE STATUTE IS THAT IF
SOME IF A WATER CUSTOMERS ARE
USING MORE THAN THEIR WATER USE
OBJECTIVE, IT MEANS THEY ARE
USING MORE WATER THAN IS
NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THEIR
BENEFICIAL USES. SOME WOULD CALL
THAT UNREASONABLE AND WASTEFUL
OF WATER, WHICH BY THE WAY, THE
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE
TEN, SECTION TWO BANS THE WASTE
AND UNREASONABLE USE OF WATER.
NOW, I APPRECIATE THAT IT MAY BE
DIFFICULT FOR SOME AGENCIES TO
COMPLY WITH AND MEET THE
STANDARDS. THE SOLUTION IS NOT
TO GUT THE STATUTE. THE SOLUTION
IS FOR THE WATER AGENCIES TO
WORK WITH DWR, THE STATE WATER
BOARD, OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES
AND THE LEGISLATURE TO DEVELOP
PROGRAMS, POLICIES, PROJECTS,
AND PERHAPS FUNDING TO HELP
REDUCE THE WATER USE, CALIFORNIA
HAS TO BECOME MORE FRUGAL WITH
ITS WATER AND REDUCING AND
REDUCE WATER DEMAND NOT ONLY
DURING DROUGHTS, BUT MORE
IMPORTANTLY, DURING PERIODS OF
PLENTY WHERE WE CAN THEN STORE
THE WATER AND USE HELP US BECOME
MORE, FLEXIBLE IN OUR WATER USE,
AND FOR THE REASONS PREVIOUSLY
STATED, WE ARE OPPOSED TO THE
BILL. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES IN
OPPOSITION, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR
STATEMENT TO YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION, AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE. MR. CHAIR, JUST TO HEAL
THE BAY FOR THE REASONS STATED.
OPPOSE. THANK YOU. AARON
WOOLLEY, SIERRA CLUB,
CALIFORNIA, IN OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. SEEING NO OTHER WITNESSES
IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL BRING IT
BACK TO THE DIOCESE, SENATOR
LAIRD, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I
APPRECIATE THE ATTEMPT TO DO
SOMETHING ABOUT THIS IN A COUPLE
OF REFERENCES. REYES, BECAUSE
YOU REFERENCED THE SAVINGS OF
32% BY 2020, OVER THE 20% GOAL.
I WAS THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR. I HAD
A FEELING THAT OF THAT BILL AND
THE INTERESTING THING WAS, IS WE
THOUGHT IT WOULD BE SO HARD AND
CAUSED SUCH DISLOCATION ACTION
THAT IN THE NEGOTIATIONS THAT
FIRST YEAR, WE DIVIDED IT IN
HALF THAT WE COULD SPECIFY WHAT
COULD BE DONE IN THE FIRST HALF
OF TIME, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO
CHECK IN IN THE SECOND HALF OF
TIME TO SEE HOW TO MAKE THE
HARDER REDUCTIONS TO DO THAT.
AND THEN MOTHER NATURE
INTERVENED, AND THERE WAS A
SUBSTANTIAL FOUR YEAR DROUGHT
THERE WAS NOT WATER
AVAILABILITY, AND IT LED PEOPLE
TO SAVE IN A WAY THAT THEY
HADN'T EVEN CONTEMPLATED. AND
WAS CONSIDERED TOO HARD. AND
THAT IS ONE OF THE MAJOR REASONS
FOR THEIR 32. I ALSO DID THE
ORIGINAL BILL ON OUTDOOR URBAN
LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION AND TRIED
TO CRAFT IT IN A WAY THAT IT
WASN'T A REGULATION PER SE, BUT
IT GAVE EVERY CITY AND COUNTY
THE OPPORTUNITY TO ADOPT THEIR
OWN ORDINANCE WITH SAVING. AND
IF THEY COULDN'T DO THAT, IT
THEN THE STATE WOULD HAVE A
MODEL ORDINANCE THAT WOULD BE
IMPOSED, BUT IT WOULD GIVE THE
LOCALS THE CHANCE TO DO IT IN A
WAY THAT IT PRESERVED LOCAL
CONTROL, BUT PRESERVE THE FACT
THAT WE WERE ACTUALLY GOING TO
CUT WATER. IT WAS JUST A MATTER
OF HOW AND I DO TAKE SERIOUSLY
THE FACT THAT THERE ARE THREE
BILLS ON THE AGENDA TODAY. AND
ONE OF THE REASONS I'M JUST
GOING TO MAKE A LITTLE LONGER
COMMENTS HERE IS IT APPLIES TO
ALL THREE BILLS. AND I DO
BELIEVE IT'S PREMATURE TO BE
REALLY STRINGENT ON THE
REGULATIONS BEFORE THEY'RE
FINALIZED. AND THE BILLS WERE
INTRODUCED AFTER THE, AFTER THE
FIRST ITERATION OF THE
REGULATIONS AND THE REPORT THAT
WAS DONE BY THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST WAS ON THE FIRST
ITERATION. AND I THINK MANY
THINGS WERE ADDRESSED FIRST, AND
THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE
AMENDMENTS TO EACH BILL TO MOVE
THEM ALONG WITH WHAT THE SECOND
ITERATION WAS. EVEN THOUGH IT IS
STILL GOING. AND SO, I READ
THESE THREE AND BELIEVED THAT I
WOULD ONLY VOTE FOR A BILL WHERE
THE AUTHOR TOOK THE AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE IT ADDRESSED THAT, AND
ONE CLEARLY TOOK IT AT THE TIME
OF THE AGENDA PACKET. YOU DID
NOT TAKE IT. AND A THIRD PERSON
I TALKED TO ON THE FLOOR
YESTERDAY AND SAID YOU'D BE VERY
WISE TO TAKE THE AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE I INTEND TO VOTE AGAINST
ANY OF THE THREE BILLS WERE THE
AMENDMENTS ARE NOT TAKEN, AND SO
I WOULD BE WILLING TO VOTE FOR
YOUR BILL WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE IT ADDRESSES THE CHANGES
AND IT ADDRESSES THE WHOLE ISSUE
OF JUST SOME THINGS THAT NEED TO
BE ADDRESSED AS IT CHANGES AND
BEFORE THE REGULATIONS ARE
FINALIZED. AND SO IF
MIRACULOUSLY, YOU DECIDE AT SOME
POINT TO TAKE THE AMENDMENTS, I
WOULD SUPPORT YOUR BILL. BUT IN
YOUR CURRENT STANCE OF NOT
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS, I WILL
OPPOSE YOUR BILL WHEN IT COMES
UP. SO I JUST WANTED TO BE CLEAR
ABOUT THOSE REASONS. AND MR.
CHAIR, I APPRECIATE THE CHANCE
TO EXPRESS MYSELF. I WILL SAY I
ASSOCIATE MY COMMENTS WITH MY
COLLEAGUE. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF
RUNNING ALL THE PREVIOUS BILLS.
I THANK YOU, SENATOR. SENATOR
GROVE. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
WITH THE CHAIR'S INDULGENCE, MAY
I ASK THE LÀ A QUESTION? YES.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DID THE
UPDATED REGULATIONS CHANGE THE
STANDARDS WATER SUPPLIERS HAVE
TO MEET ON FOR OUTDOOR WATER
STANDARDS? DID YOU MEAN THE
SECOND THE NEW ONES OR THE FIRST
SET? THE REVISED. THE REVISED?
REVISED SET. THEY DID NOT CHANGE
THE STANDARD, BUT THEY
LENGTHENED THE TIMELINE BY WHICH
SUPPLIERS HAD TO ATTAIN THAT
STANDARD. SO DID THEY, SO ON THE
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DWR'S
RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE OUTDOOR
STANDARDS, WHAT WAS THE WATER
BOARD REQUIRING FROM WATER
AGENCIES? WHAT THE WATER BOARD
IS REQUIRING THAT ULTIMATELY,
THE RESIDENTIAL OUTDOOR WATER
STANDARD BE SET AT A LANDSCAPE
EFFICIENCY FACTOR OF 0.55 AND
THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES HAD RECOMMENDED A
LANDSCAPE EFFICIENCY FACTOR OF
0.63 AND JUST ONE. ONE
ADDITIONAL COMMENT THAT I WOULD
MAKE IS THAT SUPPLIERS DON'T
HAVE TO MEET ANY OF THESE
INDIVIDUAL STANDARDS, THEY JUST
HAVE TO MEET THE TOTAL WATER USE
OBJECTIVE AS A WHOLE. AND I
GUESS MY LAST THING THAT I
BECAUSE I REPRESENT INLAND
EMPIRE AND ONE OF THE LARGEST
POVERTY COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE
WITH, THE HIGHEST MEDI-CAL
RECIPIENTS IN THE STATE, MY
DISTRICT HAS, THERE WAS I
UNDERSTAND THAT THE LAO SAID IT
MAY DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACT
THE INLAND AREA AND THE LOW
INCOME FAMILIES OR COMMUNITIES.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT TO ME ON
WHY YOU THINK THAT? YEAH. FOR
ONE, THERE'S A COUPLE REASONS.
FOR ONE, FAMILIES WHO ARE LOWER
INCOME MAY ALREADY BE TAKING
MEASURES TO LIMIT THEIR WATER
USE. AND IF, AS A COST SAVINGS
MEASURE AND IF SUPPLIERS HAVE TO
INCREASE RATES IN ORDER TO
COMPLY WITH THE NEW
REQUIREMENTS, THERE MAY BE LESS
ROOM FOR THOSE CUSTOMERS TO
FURTHER REDUCE THEIR WATER USE,
AND WE FOUND A STUDY, A STUDY
FROM STANFORD THAT WAS TALKING
ABOUT THAT VERY ISSUE. IN
ADDITION, LOWER INCOME CUSTOMERS
MAY BE LESS ABLE TO TAKE SOME OF
THE MEASURES TO REDUCE OVERALL
WATER USE BECAUSE IT'S HARD TO
TAKE ADVANTAGE OF REBATE AND
INCENTIVE PROGRAMS UNLESS THEY
ARE WHAT ARE CALLED SORT OF
DIRECT INSTALL, WHERE THE WATER
SUPPLIER COMES IN, PAYS FOR THE
ENTIRE THING, AND DOES THE
INSTALLATION OF WHATEVER PROJECT
OR FIXTURE REPLACEMENT. HOWEVER,
MOST PROGRAMS ARE ARE REBATE
PROGRAMS, SO THE CUSTOMER HAS TO
PAY THE UPFRONT COST, THEN APPLY
FOR A REBATE, AND THE REBATE
DOESN'T TYPICALLY, COVER THE
ENTIRE COST. SO IT CAN BE
DIFFICULT FOR LOWER INCOME
FAMILIES TO BOTH PAY THE,
UPFRONT COST AS WELL AS AFFORD
THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE
REBATE AMOUNT AND THE TOTAL COST
OF THE PROJECT. FOR EXAMPLE, FOR
TURF CONVERSION OR RIGHT TO
CHANGE THE LANDSCAPE IN THEIR
HOUSE. SO MY LAST THING IS, IS
THAT I KNOW YOU CAN'T TAKE A
POSITION ON THE BILL, BUT THE
LANGUAGE IN MR. NEAL'S BILL,
DOES THAT HELP OR HURT MY
CONSTITUENTS BASED ON WHAT YOU
JUST SAID FOR LOW INCOME
FAMILIES, DOES MR. NEAL'S BILL
ADDRESS THAT? WELL, I HAVEN'T
OUR OFFICE HASN'T DONE ANY KIND
OF, YOU KNOW, FORMAL EVALUATION
VERSION OF THE BILL, BUT BASED
ON ON SOME OF THE STUFF,
SPECIFICS OF THE BILL, YEAH, IT
COULD LOWER COSTS FOR THE
SUPPLIERS, WHICH THEN WOULD
POTENTIALLY LEAD TO LOWER RATE
REDUCTIONS IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE
PRIMARILY DEPENDENT ON ON RATES
FOR THEIR REVENUE. THANK YOU I
DO I HAVE A WATER DISTRICT THAT
WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE
STATE FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS TO
TRY TO SUPPLY THEM, THE DEL ORO
WATER DISTRICT AND THE RATES
HAVE GONE UP ALMOST 600. AND A
LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE FARMING
COMMUNITY CAN'T AFFORD 600%
INCREASES IN THEIR WATER. AND SO
I'M LOOKING FOR SOLUTIONS FOR
THAT. I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. SENATOR GROVE, I HAD
A FOLLOW UP QUESTION FOR THE LAO
. JUST, WHEN YOU WHEN, WHEN DO
YOU EXPECT TO HAVE A FORMAL
ANALYSIS OF THE, THE REVISED
REGULATIONS? OUR OFFICE ISN'T
INTENDING TO DO THAT. OKAY WE
WERE REQUIRED BY SB 606 TO
RELEASE A REPORT BY JANUARY. THE
TIMING WAS A LITTLE, AWKWARD
JUST BECAUSE THE BILLS REALLY
HADN'T BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED.
THE REGULATIONS HADN'T BEEN. AS
FAR AS THOSE REGULATIONS, DO YOU
HAVE A VIEW YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE
TO REVIEW THEM? WOULD THEY ALSO
ADDRESS SOME OF THE COST
CONCERNS RAISED BY SENATOR
GROVE? THE. YEAH, AGAIN, WE
HAVEN'T DONE THAT ASSESSMENT.
BUT THE REVISED REGULATIONS DO,
PROVIDE A RESPOND TO SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WE RAISED IN OUR
REPORT AND HAVE BEEN RAISED BY
MANY OTHERS AS WELL. TO SORT OF
SIMPLIFY SOME OF THE ASPECTS OF
THE REGULATIONS, AND ALSO GIVE
SUPPLIERS AS SORT OF ADDITIONAL
TIME TO GET THERE. RIGHT? SO, SO
IT WOULD NOT UNDER THE REVISED
REGULATIONS, WE SHOULD NOT
EXPECT A 600% INCREASE IN
PRICES. I COULDN'T I COULDN'T
COMMENT ON THAT. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT. AND
I'LL JUST NØ SORRY I WASN'T I
WASN'T SAYING EVERYBODY'S BILL
WAS GOING TO GO UP 600. I JUST
DIDN'T KNOW. BUT I BUT I JUST
WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THE
SECOND REGULATION, THE REVISED
SET OF REGULATIONS, AS I THINK
SENATOR LEHRER DESCRIBED, YOU
KNOW, DO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE
CONCERNS. AND SO WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT THE LAO REPORT, THAT'S
OBVIOUSLY DEALING WITH THE FIRST
SET OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS. AND
SO I WOULD JUST ECHO A LOT OF
WHAT THE SENATOR FROM WHERE ARE
YOU FROM, AGAIN, SANTA CRUZ, MY
APOLOGIES, BUT GO BANANA SLUGS
SAID OR SAID EARLIER FAIR OAKS.
BUT THIS IS ONE OF THE THREE
BILLS WE'RE HEARING AND, YOU
KNOW, WHILE I APPLAUD THE EFFORT
AND THE THOUGHTFULNESS OF THIS,
YOU KNOW, I DO BELIEVE IT'S
PREMATURE TO AMEND THE LAW AT
THIS POINT IN TIME WHILE
REGULATIONS ARE STILL SO MUCH IN
FLUX. AND WE'VE SEEN A SECOND
DRAFT THAT HAS REALLY
INTERNALIZED A LOT OF THE
CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED IN THE
LÀ Þ REPORT AND OTHERS. AND AT
THE SAME TIME, THIS PARTICULAR
BILL SEEKS TO UNDERMINE EXISTING
WATER CONSERVATION LAW, MAKES
WATER URBAN WATER USE DIFFICULT
TO ENFORCE, AND RESTRICTS THE
WATER BOARD'S AUTHORITY, AMONG
OTHER THINGS. AND WE KNOW THAT
THE RAINS WE'VE SEEN OVER THE
LAST FEW YEARS ARE NOT
INDICATIVE OF LIKELY INDICATIVE
OF WHAT WE'LL SEE AS FAR AS
WATER COMING FORWARD. AND I DO
THINK CONSERVATION IS GOING TO
STILL BE VERY, VERY CRITICAL AS
AN OBJECTIVE. SO FOR THOSE
REASONS, PARTICULARLY WITHOUT
YOU TAKING THE AMENDMENTS, I'M
GOING TO BE A NO ON THIS BILL
AND RECOMMENDING THAT. BUT WITH
THAT, IF YOU'D LIKE TO CLOSE,
THANK YOU, A COUPLE OF POINTS
ABOUT THE EXCUSE ME, THE
OPPOSITION STATEMENTS. FIRST,
THE WATER LOSS STANDARD IS NOT
ELIMINATED OR IGNORED. IT'S JUST
INCLUDED IN THE OVERALL
ALLOWANCE OF WATER USE. AND THE
CAP OF 20, IS I BELIEVE,
REASONABLE BECAUSE OF THE
EVIDENCE THAT ANYTHING BEYOND
THAT IS POTENTIALLY
UNREASONABLE. AND, WITH THE
POINT OF FLEXIBILITY BEING BUILT
IN AND THE REVISED REGULATIONS,
I WOULD SUBMIT NOT ENOUGH, THE
SECOND WITNESS INDICATED THAT,
MY BILL IS UNREASONABLE AND
WASTEFUL. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT
WHAT IS UNREASONABLE IS A .52
BENEFIT COST RATIO FOR A 1%
OVERALL SAVINGS IN WATER. I
WOULD AGREE CONSERVATION IS
IMPORTANT, AND I'VE ALWAYS
THOUGHT THAT I PARTICIPATED IN
THE, WATER FORUM PROCESS HERE IN
THE SACRAMENTO REGION IN THE
1990S, AND I WAS STRONGLY IN
FAVOR OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
METERS, WHICH WAS NOT A
PARTICULARLY POPULAR THING IN
OUR REGION HERE. AND I WOULD
ADD, NOT IN MY HOUSEHOLD. SO I
AGREE, CONSERVATION OAN IS
ABSOLUTELY IMPORTANT. AND THIS
DOESN'T DO AWAY WITH THAT NOTION
. AND THE REASON THAT I AM NOT
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS IS
BECAUSE IT DEFEATS THE PURPOSE
OF WHAT I'M TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH
BY THIS BILL. IN OTHER WORDS,
ACCEPTING THE AMENDMENTS WILL BE
A FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENT OF THE
BILL BEING DEFEATED FROM MY
STANDPOINT. AND WHAT IS
IMPORTANT HERE IS, THE COST
RETURN ON THE INITIAL, DRAFT OF
THE REGULATION WHICH THE LAO AND
BY THE WAY, I APPRECIATE MISS
PATEK BEING HERE TO PROVIDE,
TECHNICAL EXPERTISE BECAUSE
WATER IS VERY COMPLICATED
INDEED, AND, OF COURSE, THEY'RE
NOT TAKING A POSITION ON THE
BILL, BUT THEY DID HAVE A VERY
CRITICAL WRITE UP OF THE INITIAL
DRAFT OF THE REGULATIONS, AS DID
PICK UP. AND I THINK IT'S
IMPORTANT TO TAKE NOTE OF THAT
BECAUSE OF THE MOTIVATION THAT
CREATED THAT, THOSE REGULATIONS
IN THE FIRST PLACE. AND I DO NOT
THINK THAT THE REVISIONS THAT
ARE BEING DISCUSSED, BRING INTO
THE REGULATORY MIX, EITHER THE
FLEXIBILITY OR COST
REASONABLENESS THAT'S NECESSARY.
AND I WANT TO STRESS THIS, THAT
THIS IS GOING TO TRANSLATE INTO
HIGHER RATES FOR THE, THE
CUSTOMERS OF THE WATER DISTRICTS
, PARTICULARLY INLAND AREAS. AND
DISADVANTAGED AREAS. AND WHEN
THOSE RATES, HIT THEIR BILLS, WE
NEED AS THE OVERSIGHT OF THE
WATER BOARD, WE NEED TO BE
PREPARED TO SAY THAT WE FULLY
AGREE WITH THE REGULATIONS AND
THE RESULTANT IMPACT ON THEIR
POCKETBOOK. SO WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE VOTE
, THANK YOU, SENATOR. WE DO NOT
HAVE A QUORUM AT THIS POINT IN
TIME, BUT WE'LL TAKE THAT UP AT
THE WHEN WE DO. I'M ASSUMING
THAT THE BILL HAS BEEN MOVED, WE
DON'T HAVE A MOTION YET, BUT
WHEN WE'LL HAVE A. YEAH, WE
DON'T HAVE A QUORUM, BUT WHEN
IT'S WHEN WE DO, WE'LL WE'LL SEE
IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A
MOTION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
THANK YOU. THANKS, I JUST SAW
SENATOR ASHBY. SENATOR ASHBY, IF
YOU'RE STILL OUTSIDE, YOU CAN
PRESENT. IF NOT, I WILL. WE HAVE
A DELAY ON THE TAPE. SO SHE'S
NOT QUITE HEARING YOU YET? YES.
IS SHE RIGHT OUTSIDE OR DID SHE
LEAVE? SHE SAID SHE AND SHE SAID
OKAY, I GUESS, WE'LL PRESENT
SENATOR SB 1402.
THANK YOU. WE'LL NOW HEAR
SENATOR MIN'S BILL, SB 1402. GO
AHEAD, SIR, WHEN YOU'RE READY.
THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. SB 1402
WOULD REQUIRE ALL STATE AGENCIES
TO CONSIDER THE 30 BY 30 GOAL
WHEN ADOPTING, REVISING OR
ESTABLISHING PLANS, POLICIES AND
REGULATIONS THAT DIRECTLY AFFECT
LAND USE, NATURAL RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT, WATER USE AND
QUALITY AND BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION. CALIFORNIA IS HOME
TO ONE OF 25 GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY
HOTSPOTS, BUT THIS BIODIVERSITY
IS UNDER THREAT FROM CLIMATE
CHANGE, HABITAT LOSS AND
FRAGMENTATION, INVASIVE SPECIES,
DISEASE, PESTS AND POLLUTION.
CONSERVATION IS ONE OF THE BEST
TOOLS WE HAVE TO PREVENT FURTHER
EXTINCTIONS AND PREVENT OR
PROTECT OUR BIODIVERSITY AND
ECOSYSTEMS. IN 2020, GOVERNOR
NEWSOM ISSUED EXECUTIVE ORDER N
82 DASH 20 TO ADOPT A GOAL TO
CONSERVE AT LEAST 30% OF
CALIFORNIA'S LAND AND COASTAL
WATERS BY THE YEAR 2030, A
CRUCIAL GOAL IN LINE WITH WHAT
SCIENTISTS SAY WE NEED TO
PREVENT MASS EXTINCTIONS TO
ENSURE THAT THIS GOAL REMAINED A
COMMITMENT FOR FUTURE
ADMINISTRATIONS. LAST YEAR, I
AUTHORED SB 337 TO CODIFY THE 30
BY 30 GOAL INTO STATUTE. WHILE
CALIFORNIA HAS MADE CRITICAL
INVESTMENTS IN CONSERVATION TO
FURTHER THIS 30 BY 30 GOAL, IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT THIS GOAL ALSO BE
ROOTED IN THE PLANS, POLICIES
AND REGULATIONS OF OUR STATE
AGENCIES, SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE
EMPHASIZED IN NUMEROUS HEARINGS
DURING MY TENURE AS CHAIR HERE.
SO WITH THAT, I DON'T HAVE ANY
WITNESSES, BUT WOULD
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR, DO YOU HAVE ANY WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT? ALEX LOOMER, ON
BEHALF OF AUDUBON CALIFORNIA,
CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY,
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE AND
PACIFIC FOREST TRUST AND
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MA'AM. AARON WOOLLEY, SIERRA
CLUB, CALIFORNIA, IN SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. DENNIS O'CONNOR WITH
THE MONO LAKE COMMITTEE IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, JULIE
LASZEWSKI, ON BEHALF OF EAST BAY
REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
SEMPERVIRENS MIDPENINSULA
REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT,
CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS
FOUNDATION AND LAND TRUST OF
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, ALL IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
MARK FENSTERMAKER, FOR THE
CALIFORNIA COUNCIL OF LAND
TRUSTS, THE PENINSULA OPEN SPACE
TRUST, AND THE WILDLANDS
CONSERVANCY IN SUPPORT. THANKS
TO THE AUTHOR. THANK YOU.
MICHAEL. JARED, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE FOR
BIODIVERSITY AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
WITNESSES IN SUPPORT? ANY
WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION GOING
ONCE SIX. SEEING NONE, I'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE DAIS.
SENATOR LAIRD. ALL RIGHT. THIS
IS A GOOD BILL. IT IMPLEMENTS
THE STRATEGY I NOTICED IN THE
ANALYSIS S THERE'S NO FORMAL
OPPOSITION. THE ONE THING I
WOULD CALL ATTENTION TO IS THAT
IF WE DO NOT HAVE MONEY IN A
BOND OR ANOTHER PLACE TO ACQUIRE
LAND OR DO EASEMENTS, WE WON'T
HAVE THE ABILITY TO IMPLEMENT
THAT. AND THAT IS A VERY
IMPORTANT THING. I KNOW I'M AN
EX OFFICIO MEMBER OF THE COASTAL
CONSERVANCY, AND THEY WERE JUST
GIVEN NOTICE IN THE LAST COUPLE
OF DAYS THAT THERE'S, IN
ESSENCE, A FREEZE ON GENERAL
FUNDS, AND THEY HAVE A LIMITED
AMOUNT, SOMETHING LIKE 25
MILLION LEFT IN BONDS, WHICH IS
TO BIG PROJECTS OR THREE BIG
PROJECTS. AND SO I'M GOING TO
STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS BILL. BUT
A COMPANION NEEDS TO BE A BOND
OR SOMETHING ELSE TO HELP
IMPLEMENT IT. I BELIEVE I WILL
MAKE THE MOTION IF WE HAVE A
QUORUM BEFORE THE END OF OUR
NATURAL LIFE. THANK YOU SENATOR,
APPRECIATE THAT. SENATOR DOLLY.
SO I, I DON'T, I KNOW THIS IS
NOT THE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
AND THERE WILL BE SOME
ASSESSMENT, BUT FOR THE 33, I
SAT ON THE SIERRA NEVADA
CONSERVANCY BOARD FOR SEVEN
YEARS AND, YOU KNOW, WE FUNDING
IS ALWAYS AN ISSUE FOR MOST OF
THE CONSERVANCIES. AND, YOU
KNOW, DOING CONSERVATION
EASEMENTS AND THE LIKE. SO WHAT
HAS ANYBODY PUT A PRICE TAG TO
LIKE THE 30 BY 30. LIKE WHAT
WHAT WE THINK IT WOULD TAKE TO
ACTUALLY PRESERVE 30? I MEAN,
30% OF CALIFORNIA IS A HELL OF A
LOT OF LAND. YEAH SO I KNOW
WE'VE DONE NUMEROUS HEARINGS ON
THIS. I THINK WE WE'RE NOT
STARTING OFF AT ZERO. SO WE'RE
TALKING, I THINK, FOR LANDS,
WE'RE LOOKING AT AROUND 23, 24%
ALREADY. SO THAT IT'S ALREADY
CONSERVED. SO WE'RE TRYING TO
INCREASE THAT TO 30. I THAT WAS
PRECISELY THE QUESTION I ASKED
THE ADMINISTRATION IN AN EARLIER
HEARING. I WANT TO SAY THIS YEAR
IT FEELS LIKE A VERY LONG YEAR.
MAYBE IT WAS LAST YEAR ON THAT
POINT AND WE DIDN'T GET A PRICE
TAG. SO WE GOT A LOT OF, YOU
KNOW, ANECDOTES AND THEY TOLD US
THEY'D GET BACK TO US. SO THAT
IS SOMETHING WE CAN FOLLOW UP
ON. SENATOR, I APPRECIATE THE
QUESTION. I DON'T THINK THIS
PARTICULAR BILL HAS A PRICE TAG
BECAUSE IT'S JUST ASKING THEM TO
CONSIDER THE 30 BY 30 GOAL, BUT
TO ACTUALLY ACHIEVE THE GOAL, TO
SENATOR LAIRD'S POINT, I DO
THINK WE ARE GOING TO NEED SOME
FUNDING. SO THE GOVERNOR DID THE
EXECUTIVE ORDER ON 30, 30. THEN
YOU FOLLOWED UP WITH THE ACTUAL
CODIFICATION, CODIFICATION AND
THIS BILL DOES THIS REQUIRES
STATE AGENCIES TO TAKE 30 BY 30
INTO ACCOUNT? OKAY. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS WOULD YOU
LIKE TO CLOSE? SIR, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR I
VOTE. THANK YOU SIR. WE'LL TAKE
THAT BILL UP, BASED ON SENATOR
LAIRD'S COMMENTS, IF OUR
LIFETIME WE HAVE A QUORUM.
OKAY, WE'RE WAITING ON AUTHORS,
AND, WE ONLY HAVE, FIVE BILLS
LEFT TO HEAR, SO HOPEFULLY WE
CAN GET SOME BEFORE THE END OF
OUR NATURAL LIFETIME. BUT I
THINK AT THIS POINT, WE WILL
TAKE A BRIEF RECESS UNTIL WE GET
OUR NEXT AUTHOR
.
SENATOR ASHBY, SO WE WILL RESUME
COMMITTEE, SENATOR ASHBY IS IN
THE ROOM. WE HAVE SB 1110, FILE
ITEM TWO. WHENEVER YOU ARE
READY, SENATOR, YOU CAN PROCEED.
GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING. I AM
HERE TO PRESENT SB 1110, THE
BILL AS INTRODUCED WAS INTENDED
TO PROVIDE THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD THE
FLEXIBILITY TO CONSIDER LOW COST
ALTERNATIVES TO WATER EFFICIENCY
PROJECTS IF THE PROJECTS
MAINTAIN CALIFORNIA'S HIGH WATER
EFFICIENCY AND ENVIRONMENTAL
STANDARDS, AND REQUIRE CGRTS,
THE PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF
CALIFORNIA AND THE LEGISLATIVE
ANALYST'S OFFICE HAVE RAISED
CONCERNS ON THE COST
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE WATER BOARD
REGULATIONS, AND IN PARTICULAR,
THE IMPACT THEY'LL HAVE ON LOW
INCOME FAMILIES, AS SB 1110
WOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE WATER
BOARD'S ENFORCEMENT PROCESS TO
ADVANCE WATER EFFICIENCY WHILE
GUARDING AGAINST
DISPROPORTIONATE IMPACTS AND
HIGH COSTS, PROTECTING THOSE LOW
INCOME FAMILIES AND RATEPAYERS.
THE BILL ADDRESSED IMMEDIATE
WATER NEEDS AND PROMOTED EQUITY
AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE,
ENSURING THAT ALL INDIVIDUALS,
ESPECIALLY THOSE IN
DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES, HAD
EQUAL ACCESS TO CLEAN AND
AFFORDABLE WATER. MOST
IMPORTANTLY, SB 1110 DID NOT
CHANGE THE WATER BOARD'S CURRENT
REGULATORY PROCESS, BUT INSTEAD
PROVIDED FLEXIBILITY TO EXERCISE
DISCRETION. SUPPORTERS INCLUDED
CALIFORNIA WATER ASSOCIATION,
THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO
SPECIFICALLY COUNCILWOMAN KATIE
VALENZUELA, AQUA CALIFORNIA
WATER EFFICIENCY PARTNERSHIP,
THE UPPER SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT, IRVINE
RANCH WATER DISTRICT, AND
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA'S WATER
ASSOCIATION, AMONGST OTHERS.
HOWEVER OUR SOMEWHAT
RELUCTANTLY, WE ARE ACCEPTING
THE AMENDMENTS IN THE COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS. SO NOW THE BILL WILL
SIMPLY PROVIDE A TWO YEAR
EXTENSION ON WHEN ENFORCEMENT
CAN BEGIN. I DO HAVE WITH ME A
LEAD WITNESS FROM REGIONAL WATER
AUTHORITY, RYAN OJAKIAN. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. SENATOR, IS
THIS YOUR ONLY WITNESS? I'M NOT
SURE, YOU HAVE ONLY LEAD. OKAY.
YOU HAVE UP TO FOUR MINUTES. I
DON'T THINK I'LL USE FOUR
MINUTES, BUT APPRECIATE THAT.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND MEMBERS,
RYAN OJAKIAN WITH THE REGIONAL
WATER AUTHORITY, RWA IS
COMPRISED OF 22 DRINKING WATER
SUPPLIERS THAT PROVIDE THE
PUBLIC SERVICE OF DRINKING WATER
TO 2.2 MILLION PEOPLE IN THE
GREATER SACRAMENTO AREA,
SPECIFICALLY IN TERMS OF SENATE
DISTRICTS, IT'S, THOSE 2.2
MILLION PEOPLE GET WATER EITHER
WHOLLY WITHIN OR PARTIALLY FROM
SENATOR ASHBY'S DISTRICT,
SENATOR NEAL'S DISTRICT SENATOR
DOLLY'S DISTRICT AND SENATOR
DODD'S DISTRICT, AND SENATOR
ALVARADO GIL'S DISTRICT, WE SPAN
FROM THE UPPER WATERSHED IN THE
AMERICAN RIVER BASIN. AND YUBA,
FEATHER RIVER. RIVER SYSTEMS TO
THE GROUNDWATER BASINS. SORRY
FOR THE DISTRACTION, IN IN THE
MIDDLE CENTRAL VALLEY.
SACRAMENTO COUNTIES. OUR JOB IS
TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN PEOPLE GO
TO THE TAP AND TURN IT ON,
THERE'S WATER THAT COMES OUT.
IT'S RELIABLE THAT THAT WATER IS
SAFE FOR THEM TO DRINK. IT'S OF
QUALITY AND THAT THAT SERVICE IS
PROVIDED AT THE LOWEST POSSIBLE
COST. WE HAVE TO DO ALL THREE OF
THOSE THINGS AT THE SAME TIME.
OTHERWISE WE'RE NOT DOING OUR
JOB. I WANT TO THANK SENATOR
ASHBY IN PARTICULAR, FOR BEING A
CHAMPION ON UNDERSTANDING THAT
THAT'S THAT'S OUR MISSION NOW.
EFFICIENCY IS PART OF DOING
THAT, AND, AND, AND WE'RE
COMMITTED TO DOING EFFICIENCY.
NOW I WANT TO SAY, AND THE
SENATOR MENTIONED THIS IN HER
SPEAKING POINTS WITH THE
AMENDMENTS WE BELIEVE. RIGHT.
THE END GAME HERE IS COMPLIANCE.
AND THAT ENFORCEMENT IS A TOOL
TO GET TO COMPLIANCE, AND THAT
IT'S IMPORTANT AS WE MOVE
FORWARD, WHEN WE GET TO THE
PHASE OF GETTING INTO
ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS, THAT WE'RE
MAKING SURE THAT THAT TOOL IS
REALLY ABOUT THAT END GAME OF
GETTING TO COMPLIANCE. SO WITH
THAT, I WILL SAY I AM IN SUPPORT
, OBVIOUSLY AND RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU, DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER
WITNESSES WHO'D LIKE TO TESTIFY
IN SUPPORT OF THIS BILL? PLEASE
LIMIT YOUR TESTIMONY TO YOUR
NAME, AFFILIATION, AND POSITION
ON THE MEASURE. DANIELLE HAYDEN
WITH THE CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL
UTILITIES ASSOCIATION. WE REALLY
SUPPORTED THE INTRODUCED VERSION
AND WILL STILL SUPPORT THIS ONE.
THANK YOU. THANKS, DANIELLE.
GOOD MORNING, JULIA HALL WITH
THE ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
WATER AGENCIES AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, LINDA VÀ. WITH THE
CALIFORNIA WATER EFFICIENCY
PARTNERSHIP AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. JAMIE MINER ON BEHALF OF
EASTERN MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT, LOCATED IN RIVERSIDE
COUNTY AND SANTA MARGARITA WATER
DISTRICT, LOCATED IN ORANGE
COUNTY, PLEASED TO SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. KIRK
KIMBALL, HIÂU FOR THE NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA WATER ASSOCIATION AND
SUPPORT. WANT TO THANK THE
SENATOR. THANK YOU. SEEING NO
OTHER WITNESSES IN SUPPORT, DO
WE HAVE ANY OTHER DO WE HAVE ANY
LEAD WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? I
SEE TWO OF YOU, SO YOU EACH HAVE
TWO MINUTES AND PROCEED WHENEVER
YOU'RE READY. DENNIS O'CONNOR
WITH THE MONO LAKE COMMITTEE
WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS, WE'RE
GOING TO BE MOVING TO NEUTRAL.
THANK YOU. CODY PHILLIPS WITH
CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE.
AND WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS MOVING TO
NEUTRAL. THANK YOU. SEEING SO
YOU'RE NOT LEAD WITNESSES ANY
OTHER WITNESSES IN OPPOSITION? I
JUST NEUTRAL HEAL THE BAY.
WHAT'S YOUR NAME? I FORGOT
JUSTIN MALONE WITH HEAL THE BAY
WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS GOING
NEUTRAL. THANK YOU. AARON WALLY
WITH SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA. WE
APPRECIATE THE COMMITTEE
AMENDMENTS AND WE'LL BE
REVIEWING THEM CLOSELY. MOVING
TO NEUTRAL, WE'LL BE REVIEWING
THEM. WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO
FULLY REVIEW, BUT WE DO
APPRECIATE THEM. THANK YOU,
ANYONE ELSE IN OPPOSITION?
SEEING NO ONE IN THE ROOM. WE'LL
MOVE BACK TO THE COMMITTEE.
SENATOR LEHRER, I WOULD JUST SAY
TO SENATOR ASHBY, UNFORTUNATELY,
YOU MISSED THE LENGTHY
DISCUSSION ON SENATOR NEELY'S
BILL, WHICH IS THAT UNFORTUNATE
OR. WELL UNFORTUNATE FROM YOUR
KNOWLEDGE, NOT FOR YOUR TIME OF
DAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. FAIR
ENOUGH. AND THE THING ABOUT IT
IS, IS THAT AT LEAST I DID. AND
SOME OTHERS DID THAT THAT
DISCUSSION APPLIED TO ALL THREE
BILLS. AND SO I BECAUSE WE HAD
SOMEBODY FROM THE LAO THAT
ACTUALLY TALKED ABOUT THEIR
ANALYSIS. AND, AND I WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE
AMENDMENTS, WHICH I COULD TELL
WAS NOT DONE WITH INCREDIBLE
ENTHUSIASM. CORRECT BUT IT
REALLY ALLOWS SOME OF US TO VOTE
UNEQUIVOCALLY FOR YOUR BILL. AND
I THANK YOU FOR THE INTENT AND
THE WORK ON IT. AND WE'LL LOOK
FORWARD TO MOVING IT WHEN WE
FINALLY GET A QUORUM. THANK YOU,
SENATOR LAIRD. ANYONE ELSE?
SENATOR DALY I JUST WANT TO SAY
THAT, I'M OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE
SUPPORTING YOUR BILL, BUT I. I
THINK WE'VE SEEN A FEW BILLS
COME THROUGH HERE, AND WE'VE,
YOU KNOW, NILO DIDN'T TAKE THE
AMENDMENT, SO HIS BILL WILL DIE.
YOUR BILL IS TAKING THE
AMENDMENT, SO APPARENTLY IT WILL
GO FORWARD. BUT AT THE END OF
THE DAY, WHAT ARE WE SAYING? I
MEAN, WE'RE HEARING FROM OUR
WATER AGENCIES THAT THE
HERTZBERG AND FRIEDMAN BILLS
AREN'T REALLY WORKING THAT WELL.
AND SO I THINK WE NEED TO I JUST
WANT TO, FOR THE RECORD, SAY
THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE SOME
ISSUES OUT THERE THAT NEED TO BE
ADDRESSED. AND WE CONTINUE TO
JUST, LIKE, KICK THE CAN DOWN
THE ROAD. THEY'RE STILL GOING TO
BE A PROBLEM THERE. SO I'LL BE
SUPPORTING YOUR BILL. BUT, WE
MAYBE NEED TO LOOK AT SOME
ADDRESSING SOME OF THESE ISSUES.
LONG TERME FOR THE WATER
AGENCIES AND MAYBE THERE ARE
PREVIOUS LEGISLATION WASN'T
PERFECT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM
THE COMMITTEE? ALL RIGHT. I'LL
JUST ADD TO THAT, YEAH. WE DID
HAVE KIND OF A ROBUST DISCUSSION
EARLIER AND AGAIN, WOULD JUST
EMPHASIZE, FIRST, THANK YOU FOR
TAKING THE AMENDMENTS, THIS IS
ONE OF THREE BILLS AND THE NHIÀU
BILL, WE'RE RECOMMENDING A NO ON
I AM RECOMMENDING I ON THIS ONE,
CONSERVATION IS IMPORTANT. AND
AS I SAID EARLIER, THE MASSIVE
RAINFALL THAT WE SAW THE LAST
FEW YEARS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT
WE'RE LIKELY TO CONTINUE SEEING.
AND SO THERE MAY BE PROBLEMS
WITH THE PREVIOUS FRAMEWORK, BUT
THERE ARE PROBLEMS THAT I KNOW
THAT THE WATER BOARD IS TRYING
TO ADDRESS. THE FIRST SET OF
PROPOSED REGULATIONS CAME UNDER
HEAVY CRITIQUE. I KNOW THAT YOUR
BILL WAS RESPONSIVE TO MANY OF
THOSE CRITICISMS, BUT WE'VE SEEN
A SECOND SET OF PROPOSED
REGULATIONS THAT HAS MOVED A LOT
IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WE'RE
LIKELY TO SEE FURTHER AMENDMENTS
TO THOSE REGULATIONS, ÓRDENES
NEW DRAFT REGULATIONS COMING
FORWARD THAT I THINK WILL
CONTINUE TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE
CONCERNS RAISED. IT'S LIKELY
THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'LL SEE
SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS TOWARDS
SOME OF THE GOALS YOU'RE LOOKING
TO ACCOMPLISH. SO WITH THAT, I
JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S PREMATURE AT
THIS POINT TO, PUT IN BINDING
LAW, PARTICULARLY LAWS THAT THAT
WOULD AFFECT CONSERVATION AND
POTENTIALLY UNDERMINE OUR
CONSERVATION GOALS FOR URBAN
WATER DISTRICTS. SO APPRECIATE
YOU TAKING THE AMENDMENTS. AND,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? WE CAN
ONLY BE AS BRAVE FOR OUR
CONSTITUENTS AS THE SYSTEM
ALLOWS US TO BE. I URGE AN AYE
VOTE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, ONCE
WE HAVE A QUORUM, WE CAN
POTENTIALLY TAKE UP THE BILL.
THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT,
APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION,
SENATOR, SENATOR, I SAW SENATOR
CABALLERO SOMEWHERE. THERE YOU
GO. SENATOR, WE HAVE FILE ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT, SB 1390, YOU CAN
PRESENT WHENEVER YOU'RE READY.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
AND MEMBERS TODAY, I'M PLEASED
TO PRESENT SB 1390, WHICH BUILDS
UPON THE PROGRESS MADE IN THE
PAST YEAR TO ENABLE CALIFORNIA
TO DIVERT TO DIVERT FLOOD FLOWS
FOR GROUNDWATER RECHARGE. HOW
CAN ANYBODY BE AGAINST
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE? I GREATLY
APPRECIATE THE CHAIR AND THE
COMMITTEE'S INPUT OUTLINED IN
THE ANALYSIS. AND I'M GOING TO
ACCEPT THE COMMITTEE'S
AMENDMENTS AND APPRECIATE THEM
VERY MUCH. IN 2023, CALIFORNIA
EXPERIENCED A DRAMATIC END TO
EXTREME DROUGHT CONDITIONS
THROUGH A SERIES OF ATMOSPHERIC
RIVERS THAT BROUGHT RECORD
SNOWPACK AND RAINFALL, CAUSING
EXTENSIVE FLOOD DAMAGE AND
EXCESS FLOWS THAT RESULTED IN
RECORD BREAKING WATER STORAGE
OPPORTUNITIES. DECADES OF
DROUGHT, POPULATION GROWTH, AND
OVERUSE OF GROUNDWATER BASINS
HAVE LEFT THEM DANGEROUSLY
DEPLETED, RESULTING IN DRY
DRINKING WATER WELLS, LOSS OF
WILDLIFE HABITAT, LAND
SUBSIDENCE, FARM LAND FALLOWING,
SEAWATER INTRUSION, CONTAMINATE
WATER WELLS IN RURAL
COMMUNITIES, AND A HOST OF OTHER
THREATS TO THE SUSTAINABLE WATER
FUTURE. RECOGNIZING THE NEED FOR
ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO MANAGE THE
DESTRUCTIVE FLOOD FLOWS AND THE
NEED TO UTILIZE EXCESS WATER FOR
THE LONG TERME HEALTH OF
GROUNDWATER BASINS, GOVERNOR
NEWSOM ISSUED AN EXECUTIVE ORDER
IN MARCH OF 23, WHICH AUTHORIZE
WATER AGENCIES TO DIVERT EXCESS
FLOWS, EXCESS FLOOD FLOWS FOR
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE WITHOUT THE
NEED TO OBTAIN A COSTLY AND TIME
CONSUMING PERMIT THAT OFTEN
DELAYED THE OPPORTUNITY TO CATCH
THAT WATER. THE PROCESS
ESTABLISHED BY THIS EXECUTIVE
ORDER WAS LATER CODIFIED IN SB
122, WITH ADDITIONAL
REQUIREMENTS. IN ORDER TO BETTER
PROTECT GROUNDWATER QUALITY AND
DOWNSTREAM WATER USERS. THE
INITIAL WATER DIVERSIONS AND
SUBSEQUENT GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
TOOK PLACE IN THE WAKE OF SB 22
AND HELPED TO REPLENISH SEVERELY
OVERDRAFTED GROUNDWATER BASINS.
HOWEVER, MORE WORK MUST BE DONE
TO FULLY REALIZE THE POTENTIAL
BENEFITS OF THESE OPPORTUNITIES,
AND SOME ROADBLOCKS WERE
IDENTIFIED IN THAT IN IN THE
WAKE OF SB 122, SB 1390 CARRIES
FORWARD THE PROGRESS OF THE
EXECUTIVE ORDER AND SB 122 BY
ALLOWING ADDITIONAL RECHARGE
PROJECTS TO BE COMPLETED IN A
SAFE AND RESPONSIBLE MANNER AND
MOVE CALIFORNIA TOWARDS A MORE
SUSTAINABLE WATER FUTURE. I'M
COMMITTED TO WORKING WITH THE
OPPOSITION COALITION AND ALL
STAKEHOLDERS STAKEHOLDERS TO
ENSURE THAT THE BILL DOES WHAT
IT IS INTENDED TO DO AND THAT IS
TO CAPTURE AND STORE ADDITIONAL
EXCESS FLOOD WATER IN CALIFORNIA
WITH ME TODAY TO TESTIFY IS
CHARLES DELGADO, POLICY DIRECTOR
FOR SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION,
AND SARAH WOLFF, PRESIDENT OF
WATERWISE, A WATER CONSULTING
FIRM. THANK YOU. AND BEFORE WE
PROCEED WITH YOUR WITNESSES, I
THINK WE HAVE ENOUGH MEMBERS TO
ESTABLISH QUORUM. SO I WILL ASK
THE ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE SENATORS MIN. HERE MIN
HERE. SALADO ALLEN. DALLI. DALLI
HERE. EGGMAN. EGGMAN. HERE.
GROVE GROVE. HERE. HURTADO.
HURTADO. HERE LAIRD. LAIRD.
HERE. LIMÓN. MENGIBAR PADILLA.
OKAY THE ASSISTANT NOTES THAT A
QUORUM HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. WE
HAVE, THREE FILE ITEMS ON BILLS
ON PROPOSED CONSENT, AND WE'LL
TAKE UP THE CONSENT CALENDAR
AFTER THIS BILL. SO WITH THAT,
WE'LL GO AHEAD AND, YOU CAN
PRESENT YOUR WITNESSES. WE HAVE
TWO WITNESSES HERE. YOU EACH
HAVE TWO MINUTES TO PRESENT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU,
GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN AND
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY
NAME IS CHARLES DELGADO. I'M
POLICY DIRECTOR FOR SUSTAINABLE
CONSERVATION. WE'RE AN
ENVIRONMENTAL NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO
COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS TO
CALIFORNIA'S NATURAL RESOURCE
CHALLENGES. SO WE'RE HERE TODAY
AS THE SPONSOR OF SB 1390, AS A
COMMON SENSE FOLLOW UP MEASURE
TO SB 122, LAST YEAR'S RESOURCES
TRAILER BILL CODIFICATION OF
EXECUTIVE ORDER N 423, WHICH
ESTABLISHED THAT AUTHORITY FOR
DIVERSION OF FLOOD FLOWS FOR
GROUNDWATER RECHARGE WITHOUT A
WATER RIGHT PERMIT. SO WE REALLY
VIEW THESE FLOWS AS AN
OPPORTUNITY TO BOLSTER DEPLETED
GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES THROUGHOUT
THE STATE. AS SUSTAINABLE AS THE
SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER
MANAGEMENT ACT CONTINUES TO BE
IMPLEMENTED, COMMUNITIES,
ECOSYSTEMS AND FARMERS MUST ALL
RELY ON OVERTAXED GROUNDWATER
BASINS. THE RESPONSIBLE
UTILIZATION OF FLOOD FLOWS FOR
RECHARGE IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO
BENEFIT VULNERABLE BASINS,
ESPECIALLY IN THE WHITE AREAS.
THOSE BASINS WITHOUT ACCESS TO
SURFACE WATER SUPPLIES AND THUS
WITH FEWER OPPORTUNITIES TO
PURSUE, RECHARGE PROJECTS. BY
UTILIZING THE AUTHORITY FIRST
ESTABLISHED IN LAST YEAR'S
EXECUTIVE ORDER AND THEN
CODIFIED IN THE NATURAL
RESOURCES TRAILER BILL, WATER
MANAGERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE
CAN HELP TO SAFEGUARD CALIFORNIA
COMMUNITIES WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY
ALLEVIATING THE PRESSURES ON
GROUNDWATER BASINS AS THEY COME
INTO COMPLIANCE WITH STATE
REGULATIONS SINCE LAST YEAR'S
CODIFICATION. HOWEVER OUR
PARTNERS HAVE ENCOUNTERED
HURDLES TO USING THIS AUTHORITY
AS IT WAS INTENDED A FLEXIBLE
TOOL FOR LOCAL AGENCIES TO
PURSUE RECHARGE PROJECTS IN A
MANNER PROTECTIVE OF PUBLIC
SAFETY, THE ENVIRONMENT AND
DOWNSTREAM WATER USERS.
AMBIGUITIES AROUND PLANNING
REQUIREMENTS FOR UTILIZATION OF
THIS AUTHORITY AND WHAT
CONSTITUTES FLOOD CONDITIONS,
HAVE PREVENTED AGENCIES FROM
CAPTURING FLOOD FLOWS WHERE THEY
OTHERWISE SHOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE
TO DO SO. TO SOLVE THIS, SB 1390
WILL ADD MORE OPTIONS FOR LOCAL
AGENCIES TO SATISFY PLANNING
REQUIREMENTS AND CLARIFY WHEN
AGENCIES MAY USE THEIR
SOPHISTICATED FLOW MODELING
TOOLS TO BEGIN DIVERTING FLOWS
THAT POSE A THREAT TO FLOOD OUR
COMMUNITIES. THESE CHANGES ARE
FULLY IN KEEPING WITH THE
ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE EXECUTIVE
ORDER AND SB 122 TO PURSUE
RECHARGE IN A TRANSPARENT MANNER
THAT MINIMIZES UNINTENDED
CONSEQUENCES FOR ALL WATER USERS
AND AFFECTED COMMUNITIES. THIS
BILL IS VERY MUCH A WORK IN
PROGRESS. WE HAVE MET WITH THE
STAFF OF THIS COMMITTEE AS WELL
AS WITH STATE WRAP UP. OKAY, WE
APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO
WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE ON THIS
AND OUR VARIOUS STAKEHOLDERS. I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR VOTE.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING. SARAH.
WOLF, WITH WATER WISE, I WORK
WITH MANY LANDOWNERS IN THE SAN
JOAQUIN VALLEY ON SIGMA
COMPLIANCE AND FORMING PROJECTS
THAT WILL HELP BOLSTER THE
AQUIFER LEVELS AND IMPROVE WATER
QUALITY, SUPPLY FOR BOTH
DRINKING WATER AND AGRICULTURE.
AND FOR THE FIRST TIME, UNDER
THE EXECUTIVE ORDER, WE WERE
ABLE TO DIVERT WATER FOR FLOOD
FROM FLOOD FLOWS AND PUT THEM TO
USE IN RECHARGE AND DIRECT
IRRIGATION, AND WITHOUT THAT
EXECUTIVE ORDER, MANY OF THESE
SAME LANDOWNERS HAVE BEEN
WORKING ON APPROPRIATIVE WATER
RIGHTS SINCE 2017 AND WERE
UNABLE TO UTILIZE THOSE PERMITS
UNDER FLOOD FLOW CONDITIONS, AND
SO THE EXECUTIVE ORDER DID
PROVIDE AN AVENUE FOR US TO
DIVERT WATER, HELP WITH FLOOD
PROTECTION AND RECHARGE OUR
AQUIFERS. AND THIS BILL, 1390,
IS CRITICAL IN JUST ENSURING
THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK
WITH OUR LOCAL AGENCIES ON
DETERMINING WHEN THOSE FLOODS
ARE ABOUT TO OCCUR AND PREVENT
THE HARM THAT OCCURRED IN MANY
AREAS LIKE PLANADA AND
THROUGHOUT THE SAN JOAQUIN
VALLEY. AND SO WE WANT TO
CONTINUE TO EXPAND THIS PROGRAM.
FARMERS REALLY JUMPED INTO IT
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 2023
BECAUSE THERE WERE SUCH ABUNDANT
SUPPLIES. BUT WE WERE THERE IS
MUCH WORK TO BE DONE TO EXPAND
THE PROJECT AND TO BE ABLE TO BE
MORE READILY AVAILABLE TO TAKE
THESE FLOOD FLOWS. SO THANK YOU
TO THE SENATOR FOR THE BILL, AND
WE LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING TO
, IDENTIFY WAYS TO AMEND IT AND
MAKE IT IT BETTER FOR ALL
PARTIES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. DO WE
HAVE ANY OTHER SUPPORT WITNESSES
IN THE ROOM? PLEASE LIMIT YOUR
TESTIMONY TO YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR AND
MEMBERS, ASHLEY WALKER WITH
NOSSAMAN ON BEHALF OF THE
MONTEREY COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND SUPPORT. THANK
YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIR.
MARK FENSTERMAKER. I WAS ASKED
TO VOICE THE SUPPORT FOR THE
CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF
COUNTIES. ALL 58 COUNTIES OF
CALIFORNIA. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS.
AARON NORWOOD, REPRESENTING THE
ALLMAN ALLIANCE, IN STRONG
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, ALEX BERRY AND
CALIFORNIA FARM BUREAU AND
SUPPORT. THANKS. THANK YOU. GOOD
MORNING, MR. CHAIR. MEMBERS
GLENN FARRELL WITH ADVOCACY ON
BEHALF OF THE STATE WATER
CONTRACTORS. WE'RE A BIT OF A
TWEENER HERE ON THIS BILL. AND I
JUST SAY THAT WE REALLY
APPRECIATE, OPPORTUNITY TO WORK
WITH THE AUTHOR AND THE SPONSORS
WHOLEHEARTEDLY EMBRACE THE
POLICY OBJECTIVES IN THE BILL.
BUT THERE ARE SOME GUARDRAILS
AND PROTECTIONS FOR THE STATE
WATER PROJECT THAT WE LIKE TO
CONTINUE TO WORK WITH. ACTUALLY,
THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS THE
AUTHOR TOOK THIS MORNING, YOU
KNOW, WE'RE CONCERNED WITH THOSE
AMENDMENTS, THE REMOVAL OF THOSE
DELTA SPECIFIC PROTECTIONS. IN
FACT, WE'RE ACTUALLY SHARE THE
OBJECTIVES OF THE OPPOSITION AND
MAKING SURE THAT THE DELTA IS
PROTECTED AND THOSE FLOWS COME
INTO THE DELTA AND NOT DIVERTED
UPSTREAM UNLESS THE CONDITIONS
ARE PRECEDENT TO ALLOW FOR THOSE
DIVERSIONS OF FLOOD FLOW. SO
LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE
AUTHOR. CONTINUE. THANK YOU. JAY
JEFFERSON WITH THE METROPOLITAN
WATER DISTRICT, WE'RE SUPPORTIVE
, AMENDED AND ALIGN OUR COMMENTS
WITH THE STATE WATER
CONTRACTORS. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, RAQUEL AYALA WITH REEB
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS ON BEHALF
OF VALLEY WATER COALITION IN
SUPPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU,
SEEING NO OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES, DO WE HAVE ANY
OPPOSITION WITNESSES, ANY LEAD
OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE ROOM
? LOOKS LIKE WE DON'T HAVE ANY.
ANY OTHER OPPOSITION WITNESSES?
OKAY. SEEING NO ONE IN
OPPOSITION, WE'LL BRING IT BACK
TO. I'M SORRY. WE ARE YOU LEAD
OR WOULD YOU? JUST LIKE YOU
COULD HAVE TWO, IF YOU LIKE.
WHAT'S THAT WITH DRAWING
OPPOSITION WITH DRAWING. ALEX
LIMMER ON BEHALF OF DEFENDERS OF
WILDLIFE AND GOLDEN STATE DAM
ASSOCIATION AND OTHER
ORGANIZATIONS THAT WROTE IN
OPPOSED THE LESS AMENDED A
LETTER, WE APPRECIATE THE
COMMITTEE'S AMENDMENTS, AND WE
APPRECIATE THE AUTHOR FOR TAKING
THOSE AMENDMENTS, AND WE WILL
REMOVE OUR OPPOSITION. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER
OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM? SEEING
NO ONE IN OPPOSITION, WE'LL
BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE,
SENATOR DALY. WELL, FIRST, I'D
JUST LIKE TO SAY THANKS FOR
BRINGING THE BILL FORWARD. I
THINK THAT, THOSE OF US WHO'VE
BEEN HERE A LONG TIME AND BEEN
THROUGH SOME DROUGHTS AND BEEN
THROUGH SOME FLOODS, AND THAT'S
NOT NEW TO CALIFORNIA, OBVIOUSLY
, WE ALL KNOW THAT CALIFORNIA IS
VERY CYCLICAL WHEN IT COMES TO,
MOISTURE AND DROUGHTS. BUT, YOU
KNOW, BEFORE WE CHANNELIZED
EVERYTHING AND BUILT RESERVOIRS,
THE VALLEY FLOODED. AND WE SAW
THAT LAST YEAR WHERE WE SAW HUGE
AMOUNTS OF WATER COMING DOWN THE
KERN, INTO THE VALLEY. AND WE,
WE CREATED A LAKE AGAIN THAT WE
DEWATERED. SO, I MEAN, IT JUST
MAKES COMMON SENSE TO BE ABLE TO
GRAB SOME OF THAT WATER WHEN WE
HAVE SITUATIONS LIKE WE HAD LAST
YEAR. AND THIS YEAR WE HAVE I
JUST SAW THAT SHASTA LAKE IS
COMPLETELY FULL, THE BIGGEST
RESERVOIR IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA IN MY DISTRICT, WHICH
IS GREAT, BUT WE NEED TO BE ABLE
TO RECHARGE OUR GROUNDWATER AS
WE HAVE DESPERATELY, TOO MUCH
ACTUALLY, OVERDRAFTED IN THE
VALLEY IN PLACES, AND WE NEED BE
ABLE TO RECHARGE IT. SO FOR ME,
THIS IS A COMMON SENSE APPROACH.
IT DID IT BEFORE WE MESSED WITH
IT, AND WE HAVE THESE
OPPORTUNITIES. WE SHOULD TAKE IT
FULL ADVANTAGE OF BEING ABLE TO
RECHARGE OUR GROUNDWATER FOR
FUTURE. AND THE COOL THING ABOUT
GROUNDWATER IS WHEN YOU RECHARGE
IT, IT DOESN'T EVAPORATE. IT'S
THERE. AND WE AND IT STAYS FOR A
LONG TIME. AND IF WE CAN JUST
GET THAT WATER BACK IN THE
GROUND. SO I WILL MOVE THE BILL
WITH THE APPROPRIATE TIME. AND
THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT
FORWARD, YOU CAN MOVE IT NOW IF
YOU'D LIKE. OKAY THIS IS THE
APPROPRIATE TIME. THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE ON COMMITTEE?
SENATOR EGGMAN. THANK YOU. AND
I'M SORRY I MISSED THE
BEGINNING, BUT YOU TOOK THE
AMENDMENTS, RIGHT? AS SOMEONE
WHO REPRESENTS THE DELTA, THE
DELTA PROVISION IS VERY
IMPORTANT TO US, SO WE
APPRECIATE IT. AND IT SOUNDS
LIKE PEOPLE MAY WANT TO CHANGE
YOUR MIND ON THAT. AND JUST TO
SAY IT'S I THINK THAT'S AN
IMPORTANT PROVISION. WE'RE ALL
IN FAVOR OF ALL THE REST OF IT,
AS LONG AS WE'RE NOT
JEOPARDIZING ONE AREA FOR
ANOTHER, OF NOTE, WE JUST OPENED
OUR NEXT STATE PARK YESTERDAY,
OUR NEW STATE PARK, WHICH IS IN
DOWN IN THE DELTA AREA, AND IT
LOOKS LIKE THE LAND USED TO
LOOK, BEFORE, BEFORE WE, YOU
KNOW, BEFORE WE'VE DONE TO
CALIFORNIA WHAT WE'VE DONE AND
ARE SO INCREDIBLY PRODUCTIVE.
BUT JUST GOES TO SHOW THAT, THAT
WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HOLD THAT
WATER WHEN WE CAN. I WORKED FOR
A LONG TIME ON MAKING
GROUNDWATER AS A BENEFICIAL USE,
AND I THINK THIS IS RIGHT ALONG
THOSE LINES. AND I'LL BE IN
STRONG SUPPORT OF THIS BILL AS
LONG AS IT STAYS IN ITS CURRENT
FORM. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
ANYONE ELSE ON COMMITTEE, SEEING
NO ONE. OKAY, THANK YOU. AND I'M
AN EYE ON THIS. BILL, WANT TO
THANK YOU FOR ACCEPTING THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS. AND, OF
COURSE, WE SAW THE FLOODS COME
IN, AND IT WAS A PRIORITY OF THE
LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR TO
STREAMLINE AND ACCELERATE THE
ABILITY OF TO DIVERT EXCESS
FLOOD FLOWS FOR GROUNDWATER
RECHARGE AND OUR BUDGET TRAILER
BILL, SB 122 CODIFIED MUCH OF
THE CONTENT OF PREVIOUS EFFORTS.
EXECUTIVE ORDERS TO AUTHORIZE
THOSE DIVERSIONS. WE APPRECIATE
YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS. I YOU'VE
WORKED WITH STAKEHOLDERS. I KNOW
YOU'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK
WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS HERE, AND
I'M GLAD TO SUPPORT THIS BILL
TODAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE?
THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIR.
AND I APPRECIATE ALL THE
COMMENTS AND ALL THE TESTIMONY
HERE TODAY, WATER IS NOT EASY TO
DO. AND WHEN YOU END UP WITH
NOBODY IN OPPOSITION, THAT'S
PROBABLY A REALLY GOOD THING, A
COUPLE OF THINGS THAT THAT ARE,
ARE RELEVANT, BUT NOT RELEVANT
TO THIS BILL IS THAT WE HAVE THE
ABILITY TO USE GOOD SCIENCE TO
DETERMINE WHERE THE WATER IS
GOING TO HIT, HOW MUCH IS LIKELY
TO HIT, WHEN IT'S GOING TO HIT,
AND TO USE THAT INFORMATION TO
DO, RELEASES FROM DAMS IF
NECESSARY FOR FLOOD CONTROL. AND
WE'VE ASKED FARMERS, THESE ARE
FARMERS THAT ARE REPURPOSING
THEIR LAND AND THEY'RE FLOODING
THE LAND DURING, THESE EXCESS
FLOWS, WE ASKED THEM TO DO DRIP
IRRIGATION AND THEY DID. AND SO
THEY PULLED OUT ALL THE, ALL THE
WEIRS AND, AND PUT IN FLOOD
IRRIGATION. NOW THEY GOT TO PUT
THEM BACK IN AGAIN SO THAT THEY
HAVE THE ABILITY TO FLOOD. AND
THEN THEY TAKE THE RISK BECAUSE
IF THEY HAVE A PERMANENT CROP,
WHICH IS A TREE OR A VINE, THEY
NEED TO BE CAREFUL OF MILDEW AND
THAT KIND OF THING. SO THIS IS A
PARTNERSHIP. THIS IS A
COOPERATIVE WORKING RELATIONSHIP
TO TRY TO BRING OUR, OUR, OUR
OUR SURFACE WATER WHEN WE HAVE
TOO MUCH INTO OUR GROUNDWATER SO
THAT FOR SUSTAINABILITY. AND SO
THERE MAY BE NEED TO MAKE MINOR
CHANGES. IN THE FUTURE. BUT
RIGHT NOW I'M WHAT I'M TRYING TO
DO IS TO BALANCE ALL THE
INTERESTS AND TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE'RE PROTECTING OUR CURRENT
FLOWS, AS WELL AS THE POTENTIAL
FOR FLOOD FLOWS TO, TO AVOID
FLOODING. SO I APPRECIATE YOUR
SUPPORT AND RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR
YOUR VOTE. THANK YOU, AS ALWAYS,
FOR YOUR THOUGHTFUL AND
COLLABORATIVE APPROACH. WE HAVE
A MOTION ON THIS BILL FROM
SENATOR DALLI. DO PASS AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS,
ASSISTANT, IF YOU COULD PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR MIN A MIN
. AYE. SATO. ALAN DALLI. DALLI.
AYE. EGGMAN. EGGMAN. AYE. GROVE
GROVE. AYE. HURTADO. HURTADO.
AYE LAIRD. LAIRD. AYE. LIMÓN.
MENGIBAR YEAH. SENATOR. LAMONE
LAMONE. SENATOR LAMONE, WE ARE
VOTING ON SB 1390. SENATOR
CABALLERO'S BILL. AND THE MOTION
IS Dð PASS, AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS. SENATOR LAMONE.
AYE FIRST BILL OF THE DAY. GOOD
TIMING, THAT VOTE IS SEVEN ZERO.
WE'LL LEAVE IT ON CALL. THANK
YOU, SENATOR CABALLERO, WE'LL
MOVE NEXT TO, THE CONSENT
CALENDAR. SO MOVE, MOVE MOTION
BY SENATOR LAIRD, WE HAVE THREE
ITEMS ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR
FILE. ITEM NUMBER ONE, SB 1088
BY ALVARADO. GIL, FILE ITEM
NUMBER FIVE, SB 1218 BY SENATOR
NEWMAN. AND FILE ITEM NUMBER
NINE, SB 1009 BY SENATOR DALLI.
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
SENATORS. MIN. MIN. AYE. SATO,
ALAN. DALLI. DALLI. AYE. EGGMAN.
EGGMAN AYE. GROVE. GROVE. AYE.
HURTADO HURTADO. AYE. LAIRD.
LAIRD. AYE LEMON. LEMON. AYE.
MENGIBAR. PADILLA. OKAY. WE HAVE
THAT. VOTE COUNT IS SEVEN ZERO.
WE'LL LEAVE IT ON. CALL WITH
THAT, WE'LL MOVE TO SENATOR FILE
ITEM NUMBER TWO, SB 1110 BY
SENATOR ASHBY. I THINK WE HAD A
MOTION FROM SENATOR DALLI, THE
MOTION IS TO PASS, AS AMENDED,
TO APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR.
MIN MIN. AYE SATO. ALAN. DALLI
DALLI. AYE. EGGMAN. EGGMAN. AYE.
GROVE GROVE. AYE. HURTADO.
HURTADO. AYE LAIRD. AYE. LAIRD.
AYE. LIMÓN. LIMÓN AYE. MENGIBAR.
PADILLA. THAT VOTE COUNT IS
SEVEN ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT ON
CALL. YES, MR. CHAIR, I WOULD
MOVE ITEM NUMBER THREE. SB 1159.
SO NEXT UP WE'RE GOING TO FILE
ITEM NUMBER THREE, SB 1159. AND
WE HAVE A VERY PROACTIVE MOTION
FROM SENATOR LAIRD DO PASS AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS
SYSTEM, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
SENATOR MIN A MIN. AYE. SALADO.
ALAN DALLI. DALLI. AYE. EGGMAN.
EGGMAN. AYE GROVE. GROVE. AYE.
HURTADO. HURTADO AYE. LAIRD.
AYE. LAIRD. AYE. LEMON LEMON.
AYE. MENGIBAR. PADILLA I WOULD
MOVE THAT VOTE COUNT IS SEVEN
ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE THAT ON CALL,
NEXT UP, WE HAVE FILE ITEM
NUMBER FOR SB 1185, WE HAVE A
MOTION FROM SENATOR DALLI. THE
MOTION IS Dð PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS, ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. SENATORS
MINH NÓ. MINH NÓ SATO. ALAN
DALLI. DALLI. AYE. EGGMAN
EGGMAN. AYE. GROVE GROVE. AYE.
HURTADO HURTADO. SHE'S OVER
HERE. HURTADO. SHE SAID AYE.
AYE. LAIRD. NÓ. LAIRD. NØ LEMON.
NO. NO. LEMON. NO. MENGIBAR
PADILLA. EGGMAN. AYE. NO
SENATOR. EGGMAN AYE. TO. NO.
OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ONE. TWO THREE.
FOUR. NO THREE IS FOUR. THE VOTE
COUNT IS 3 TO 4, WE'LL LEAVE
THAT OPEN ON CALL, AND YES, I'D
MOVE ITEM NUMBER 11, SB 1402 BY
SENATOR MINH. SO WE'LL MOVE.
THANK YOU. THE NEXT FILE ITEM
WE'LL HEAR A VOTE ON IS FILE
ITEM NUMBER 11, SB 1402 BY
SENATOR MINH. WE HAVE A MOTION
BY SENATOR LAIR. DO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS. ASSISTANT PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR MINH. I
MEAN, I SALADO, ALLEN. DALLI.
DALLI NO. EGGMAN. EGGMAN I GROVE
. NO. GROVE. NO. HURTADO HURTADO
I LAIRD I LAIRD I LEMON, LEMON I
MENGIBAR. PADILLA YEAH. AND THAT
VOTE COUNT IS FIVE TWO. WE'LL
LEAVE IT OPEN ON CALL. AND WITH
THAT, WE CAN GO BACK TO OUR
NEXT, BILL. AND SO WE I THINK,
SENATOR HURTADO, ARE YOU
PREPARED TO PRESENT. FANTASTIC.
AND WE'LL HEAR ITEM FILE, ITEM
NUMBER TEN, SB 1448 BY SENATOR
HURTADO. OKAY. SHE CAN PROCEED
WHENEVER SHE IS READY. OKAY.
GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN.
MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. I HAVE
THE EASIEST BILL ON TODAY'S
AGENDA. JUST FOR THE RECORD, BUT
I'M HERE TO PRESENT SB 1448, A
BILL THAT WILL INCREASE ACCESS
TO LAND AND MARKETS FOR SMALL
AND UNDERSERVED SERVED FARMERS.
ACCESS TO LAND IS A SIGNIFICANT
HURDLE FOR SMALL, UNDERSERVED
AND LIMITED RESOURCES. FARMERS
LAND ACCESS IS MULTIFACETED AND
COMPLEX, WITH A COMBINATION OF
HISTORICAL DISCRIMINATION AND
THEFT. PAIRED WITH TODAY'S
INCREASING PRESSURE OF HEDGE
FUNDS AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT
COMPANIES RAPIDLY PURCHASING
AGRICULTURAL LAND ACROSS
CALIFORNIA, LOCAL AND REGIONAL
FOOD SUPPLY CHAINS HAVE BEEN
DRASTICALLY UNDERFUNDED AND
UNDER-RESOURCED, LEAVING SMALL
FAMILY FARMERS TO DEVELOP NEW
SUPPLY CHAINS WITH LITTLE TO NO
FINANCIAL SUPPORT, TO INVEST IN
THE INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY FOR
SUSTAINABLE TRANSFORMATION. IN
THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS. TO
ADDRESS THESE SIGNIFICANT
CHALLENGES, TWO PROGRAMS HAVE
BEEN CREATED THE FARM TO
COMMUNITY FOOD HUBS PROGRAM AT
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
FOOD AND AG, AND THIS PROGRAM
WAS AIMED TO SUPPORT SMALL AND
UNDERSERVED FARMERS WITH THE
INFRASTRUCTURAL INVESTMENTS
NEEDED TO FORM NEW AGGREGATION
CENTERS OR FOOD HUBS TO SELL TO
INSTITUTIONAL MARKETS, AN
INVESTMENT NO OTHER CURRENT CDFA
PROGRAM PERFORMS. IN 2022, THE
AGRICULTURAL LAND EQUITY TASK
FORCE, FACILITATED BY THE
STRATEGIC GROWTH COUNCIL, WAS
ESTABLISHED THROUGH SB 179. THE
TASK FORCE IS MANDATED TO
DEVELOP A FULL REPORT OF
RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE END OF
THE THREE YEARS. WHAT A SET OF
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE
GOVERNOR AND LEGISLATURE ON
SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THE LAND
EQUITY CRISIS. HOWEVER THERE ARE
SEVERAL ADMINISTRATIVE
CHALLENGES FOR BOTH PROGRAMS.
WHILE CHARGED WITH ADDRESSING
LAND EQUITY ISSUES, THE TASK
FORCE HAS EQUITY ISSUES OF ITS
OWN. THE STRATEGIC GROWTH
COUNCIL BELIEVES IT IS NOT
AUTHORIZED TO COMPENSATE MEMBERS
OF THE TASK FORCE FOR THEIR TIME
ON THE COMMITTEE, INCLUDING THE
HISTORICALLY UNDERSERVED FARMERS
OF COLOR. THE TASK FORCE ALSO
DOES NOT HAVE TRANSPARENCY
REQUIREMENTS, AND THIS BILL
WOULD ENSURE THAT THE SET OF
RECOMMENDATIONS AT THE END OF
THREE YEARS ARE POSTED ON THE
SGC WEBSITE. SO THE SOLUTION
HERE IS THAT SB 1448 ADDRESSES
ESSENTIAL EQUITY ISSUES FOR TWO
IMPORTANT EXISTING PROGRAMS, AND
WOULD IMPLEMENT THE FALLEN
REFORMS. IT WILL CLARIFY THE
TASK FORCE MEMBERS MAY RECEIVE A
REASONABLE PER DIEM USING
EXISTING OR PRIVATE FUNDS,
SIMILAR TO OTHER TASK FORCE AND
COMMITTEES THAT COMMITTEES USE.
IT WILL ENSURE THE AGRICULTURAL
LAND EQUITY TASK FORCE REPORT IS
MADE PUBLIC AND IT STREAMLINED
THE FARM TO COMMUNITY FOOD HUB
PROGRAM ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY
REDUCING THE NUMBER OF COMMITTEE
MEMBERS BEING LESS PRESCRIPTIVE,
AND ALLOWING FOR MEMBERS OF
EXISTING CDFA COMMITTEES TO
SERVE AND EXTEND THE SUNSET FOR
THE FARM TO COMMUNITY FOOD HUB
PROGRAM. TO ENSURE IT HAS
SUFFICIENT TIME TO COMPLY WITH
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND I
BELIEVE WE HAVE HERE TODAY IN
SUPPORT JAMIE FANOUS WITH THE
COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY
FARMERS TO TESTIFY. THANK YOU,
THANK YOU. YOU HAVE UP TO FOUR
MINUTES TO TESTIFY. THANK YOU.
HI. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR MEMBERS
JAMIE FANOUS, THE POLICY
DIRECTOR AT THE COMMUNITY
ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS. WE
REPRESENT 8000 SMALL AND
UNDERSERVED FARMERS ACROSS THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND HAVE
WORKED FOR 46 YEARS TO ENSURE
THAT FAMILY SCALE AGRICULTURE
REMAINS SUSTAINABLE AND VIABLE,
IN CALIFORNIA, WE ARE LOSING
AROUND 1500 SMALL FARMS A YEAR,
DUE TO MARKET PRESSURES AND
CONSOLIDATION AND CLIMATE
CHANGE. THAT NUMBER IS GETTING
HIGHER AND HIGHER EVERY SINGLE
YEAR, TWO OF THE CORE CORE
PRIORITIES THAT I HEAR FROM
FARMERS WHEN I AM TRAVELING UP
AND DOWN THE STATE IS LAND
ACCESS AND ACCESS TO
INFRASTRUCTURE, IN PARTICULAR
THINGS LIKE FOOD HUBS. THESE ARE
INVESTMENTS THAT HAVE JUST BEEN
FUNDAMENTALLY GUTTED AND NOT
SUPPORTED ACROSS THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, IN ORDER TO SOLVE
THESE THINGS, THE FOOD HUBS
PROGRAM WAS CREATED, AS WELL AS
THE LAND EQUITY TASK FORCE.
THESE ADMINISTRATIVE CHALLENGES
ARE SIMPLY QUICK FIXES, SO WE
CAN ACTUALLY GET THESE PROGRAMS
UP AND RUNNING AND ACTUALLY GET
RESOURCES TO OUR SMALL SCALE
FARMERS, WITH THAT, I
RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR
SUPPORT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER WITNESSES
IN SUPPORT OF THE BILL, PLEASE
LIMIT YOUR TESTIMONY TO YOUR
NAME, AFFILIATION, AND POSITION
ON THE MEASURE. REBECCA MARCUS,
REPRESENTING THE CALIFORNIA
CERTIFIED CERTIFIED ORGANIC
FARMERS AND THE UNION OF
CONCERNED SCIENTISTS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SUPPORT
WITNESSES? SEEING NONE. DO WE
HAVE ANY OPPOSITION IN THE ROOM?
SEEING NO OPPOSITION. ALL RIGHT,
WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO
COMMITTEE. SENATOR LAIRD, I
WOULD MOVE THE BILL. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER SENATOR DELI, I JUST
WANT TO COMMENT BECAUSE I'M A
I'M A FARMER AND I'M A SMALL
FARMER IN CALIFORNIA. AND I JUST
WANT TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I
CAN VOTE FOR THE BILL OR NOT
VOTE FOR THE BILL, BECAUSE I
DON'T REALLY THINK IT'S GOING TO
MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE. AT THE END
OF THE DAY, THE REGULATORY
ENVIRONMENT IN CALIFORNIA, I'LL
JUST GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. MY
GRANDFATHER CAME TO CALIFORNIA
AND GOT A HOMESTEAD 80 ACRES. HE
PURCHASED 3500 ACRES MORE 75
MILES AWAY. HE HAD SEVEN KIDS
AND HE HAD MORE PEOPLE TO HELP
RUN HIS FARM. TODAY, MEGAN AND I
BOUGHT THE FARM FROM MY MOM. WE
OPERATE THE 3500 ACRES, PLUS
SOME MORE THAT WE BOUGHT, AND WE
ARE A SMALL FARMER IN CALIFORNIA
, AND MY SON AND I AND ONE
EMPLOYEE FARM ALL THAT LAND. AND
WE NEED TO GET BIGGER BECAUSE
YOU HAVE TO YOU'RE FORCED BY THE
REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT IN
CALIFORNIA TO BUY NEW HARVESTERS
THAT MEET THE CALIFORNIA AIR
RESOURCES BOARD REGULATIONS. YOU
HAVE TO BUY NEW TRUCKS AND YOU
CAN'T MAKE IT ON A SMALL FARM IN
CALIFORNIA WHEN YOUR EQUIPMENT
COSTS ALONE ARE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, UP TO A
HALF A MILLION FOR A HARVESTER.
NOW TO HARVEST OUR SEED. AND WE
ARE CERTIFIED ORGANIC, AND WE'VE
DONE EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DO THE
RIGHT THING IN CALIFORNIA. BUT I
MUST GROW MORE. AND SO WHAT WE
SEE HAPPENING IS THE ORIGINAL 80
ACRE HOMESTEAD THAT MY
GRANDFATHER GOT. THERE WERE
LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF FARMERS
WHO VETERANS WHO GOT THOSE
HOMESTEADS, AND THERE ARE 16
LARGE FARMERS IN THAT VALLEY NOW
IN OUR VALLEY WHERE WE LIVE,
THERE ARE 4 OR 5 FARMERS THAT
KEEP CONTINUING TO BUY OUT THE
FARMS AS THEY GO OUT OF
BUSINESS, BECAUSE THEY CAN'T
COMPETE IN THE VALLEY WHERE THE
SENATOR THAT'S SUPPORTING THIS
BILL. WE HAVE HEDGE FUNDS COMING
IN AND BUYING UP FARMS. THE
FARMER MAY SELL THEIR LAND AND
STILL OPERATE IT FOR THE HEDGE
FUND. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY,
THE FAMILY FARM OR THE SMALL
FARMER WHO'S TRYING TO START
THERE IS NO WAY YOU CAN START A
FARM IN CALIFORNIA IF YOU HAVE
TO BUY THE LAND AND THE
EQUIPMENT AND TRY TO COMPETE,
THERE IS NO WAY. AND IT'S
HAPPENING ACROSS AMERICA TOO.
THAT'S WHY YOU SEE RURAL
COMMUNITIES EVAPORATING, BECAUSE
THERE'S NO PEOPLE LEFT, BECAUSE
WE MECHANIZE EVERYTHING AND WE
HAVE TO COMPETE. SO I'LL SUPPORT
YOUR BILL, BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO
CHANGE THE FACTS. AND WHEN YOU
TALK ABOUT DISADVANTAGED PEOPLE
GETTING INTO THE INTO THE
WORKFORCE, I MEAN, THERE ARE A
FEW, THAT I KNOW THAT THAT WERE
IMMIGRANTS THAT CAME WHO WERE
ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, GET A LEASE
AND START FARMING, AND THEY WERE
SUCCESSFUL. BUT IN TODAY'S
WORLD, MY OWN CHILDREN, I'M
ENCOURAGING THEM TO FIND ANOTHER
TRADE SO THAT THEY CAN SUPPORT
THE FAMILY FARM, BECAUSE THE
FAMILY FARM CANNOT SUPPORT
ITSELF BECAUSE IT'S TOO
COMPETITIVE IN CALIFORNIA. SO
THAT IS THE REALITY OF WHAT WE
SEE. AND THE CRAZY THING IS, IS
THAT THERE WAS A REPORT OUT
YESTERDAY OR THE DAY BEFORE
ABOUT THE PESTICIDES ON OUR FOOD
THAT ARE ILLEGAL TO HAVE IN
CALIFORNIA, AND THE REASON WE'RE
GETTING THOSE PESTICIDES IN
CALIFORNIA IS BECAUSE THEY'RE
COMING FROM CHILE, MEXICO AND
OTHER COUNTRIES THAT DON'T HAVE
THE SAME LAWS THAT WE HAVE. BUT
THEY'RE WE'RE IMPORTING IT IN
HERE, AND WE'RE SEEING THOSE
THOSE PESTICIDES ON OUR ON OUR
FOOD. AND SO WE HAVE A LOT OF
WORK TO DO ON PARITY WHEN IT
COMES TO WHAT WE DO IN
CALIFORNIA VERSUS WE'RE PUSHING
ALL OF OUR AG OUTSIDE OF
CALIFORNIA BECAUSE LABOR IS
CHEAP THERE. WATER IS AVAILABLE
AND THEY DON'T HAVE ALL THE LAWS
THAT WE HAVE AIR QUALITY. SO I
JUST WANT TO TAKE THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO TELL YOU WHAT'S
HAPPENING IN THE AGRICULTURAL
COMMUNITY. AND AS LONG AS WE
CONTINUE TO GO DOWN THIS PATH,
YOU WILL THERE WILL BE THE
FAMILY FARM WILL BE NO MORE. AND
I WILL TELL YOU THIS, THE FAMILY
FARMERS REALLY DO TAKE CARE OF
THEIR LAND. THEY'RE THE BEST
OPERATORS. THEY CARE ABOUT THEIR
LAND. THEY CARE ABOUT THE
GENERATIONS OF PEOPLE THAT
ACKNOWLEDGE IT'S THERE. BUT AT
THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S A
COMPETITIVE MARKET. AND IF YOUR
PRODUCT IS IF YOU'RE REGULATED
OUT OF BUSINESS, YOUR PRODUCT,
AND WE DON'T SET THE MARKETS,
THE MARKETS ARE SET ON THE WORLD
STAGE. AND THAT'S THE THAT'S THE
REALITY. SO I'LL SUPPORT YOUR
BILL. BUT I WILL TELL YOU IT'S
NOT GOING TO DO ANYTHING TO
CHANGE THE SCENARIO. I AM
CONCERNED ABOUT PAYING PEOPLE TO
BE ON THE BOARD, BUT IT DOESN'T
MATTER TO ME. I'LL GO AHEAD AND
SUPPORT YOUR BILL AND ACTUALLY
HAPPILY MOVE THE BILL, BUT IT'S
NOT GOING TO CHANGE ONE BIT. WE
WILL NOT SEE. MAYBE A MICRO
FARMER, SOMEBODY THAT ACTUALLY
PRODUCES FOOD AND SELLS IT ON
THE EDGE OF THE STREET, BUT
WE'LL HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE THEM TO,
TO COMPETE AS WELL. THANK YOU
FOR YOUR STATEMENT, SENATOR, ANY
OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM
THE DAIS? OKAY. SEEING NONE,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIR. AND JUST TO
ADDRESS, MEMBER OF THE
COMMITTEES COMMENTS, I JUST WANT
TO SAY THAT I, I DON'T DISAGREE
WITH WHAT WITH WHAT HE STATED. I
OBVIOUSLY AGREE, AND WE, I AT
TIMES FEEL HOPELESS AS WELL. BUT
I HAVE A LOT OF HOPE IN, IN THE
FARMERS, OUR FAMILY FARMERS AND
THAT'S WHY WE'RE PUSHING AND
WORKING HARD TO MAKE SURE THAT
WHATEVER IT TAKES TO, MAKE SURE
THAT THEY, THEY THRIVE AND THAT
THEY'RE SUCCESSFUL AND THAT WE
BUILD UPON THAT, THAT'S WHY I'M
HERE. THAT'S WHY I HAVE THIS
BILL. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR
SUPPORT IN YOUR COMMENTS. AND
WITH THAT, I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR AN AYE VOTE. THANK YOU,
SENATOR HURTADO, WE HAVE A
MOTION FROM SENATOR DALLI ON THE
BILL. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS TO
ADD ONE FROM ME. I'M SORRY, DID
YOU HAVE A COMMENT AS WELL? NO I
MADE THE MOTION. OH, I'M SORRY,
I'M SORRY I MISSED THAT. OKAY HE
WAS, MORE LOQUACIOUS, MR.
SENATOR, WE HAVE A MOTION. SORRY
ABOUT THAT, SENATOR. WE HAVE A
MOTION FROM SENATOR, LAIRD, YOU
GUYS CAN ARM WRESTLE LATER, THE
MOTION IS DUE PASSED.
APPROPRIATE ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR MINH. Ã.
MINH. AYE. CELADO. ELLEN DILLY
DALLY. AYE. EGGMAN GROVE. GROVE.
AYE. HURTADO HURTADO. AYE.
LAIRD. LAIRD. AYE LIMÓN. LIMÓN.
AYE. MENGIBAR PADILLA. OKAY.
WE'RE AT SIX, THE VOTE COUNT ON
THAT IS SIX ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT
OPEN ON CALL. WE HAVE OUR LAST
TWO AUTHORS IN THE ROOM. SENATOR
ARCHULETA, IS HERE TO PRESENT
FILE ITEM NUMBER SIX, SB 1330.
SENATOR ARCHULETA, YOU CAN
PROCEED WHENEVER YOU ARE READY.
THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY. AND
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, THANK YOU
ONCE AGAIN. SENATE BILL 1330
WOULD ENACT CHANGES TO THE 2018.
QUOTE UNQUOTE, MAKING WATER
CONSERVATION A WAY OF LIFE. AND
THESE LAWS BASED ON
RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYSIS OFFICE
REPORT FROM EARLIER THIS YEAR.
SO IT'S PRETTY FRESH. LET ME
BEGIN BY ACCEPTING ALL. LET ME
SAY AGAIN, BY ACCEPTING ALL THE
COMMITTEE SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS
AND THANKING THE COMMITTEE FOR
THE AND THE STAFF FOR THE WORK
AND THE CHAIR AS WELL, IT WAS A
LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT. BUT
AGAIN, ALL THE AMENDMENTS HAVE
BEEN ACCEPTED, AND I CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE ALL THE EFFORTS, THE
2018 LAW ESTABLISHED A FRAMEWORK
FOR LONG TERME IMPROVEMENTS IN
URBAN WATER USAGE, EFFICIENCY
AND DROUGHT PLANNING. AS
CALIFORNIA ADAPTS TO A CLIMATE
CHANGE AND ITS IMPACTS. THE
LEGISLATION REQUIRES JOHNMYERS
LONG TERME URBAN WATER USE
EFFICIENCY STANDARDS THAT
REQUIRE URBAN RETAIL WATER
SUPPLIERS TO EXTEND THE STATE'S
STATEWIDE 2020 WATER
CONSERVATION TARGETS REQUIRED BY
20 OR BY 2007. LEGISLATION. THE
STATE WATER BOARD, IN
COORDINATION WITH THE DEPARTMENT
OF WATER RESOURCES, WAS REQUIRED
TO ADAPT LONG TERME STANDARDS,
VARIANCES, GUIDELINES, AND
METHODOLOGIES FOR CALCULATING
URBAN WATER USAGE AND MEET THOSE
OBJECTIVES BY JUNE 30TH OF 2022,
DUE TO COVID AND OTHER FACTORS.
WE ARE STILL WAITING ON THOSE
REGULATIONS. MEMBERS, I MAY BE
CLEAR, LOCAL AND STATE ACTIONS
HAVE LED TO WATER USE EFFICIENCY
GAINS TO THE EXTENT THAT OUR
URBAN AREAS USE REGULARLY. THE
SAME TOTAL AMOUNT OF WATER TODAY
AS THEY DID BACK IN 1990.
DESPITE SIGNIFICANT POPULATION
GROWTH, ACHIEVING GREATER WATER
USAGE EFFICIENCY WILL BE COSTLY.
SOME ESTIMATED THAT THE COST FOR
WATER SUPPLIERS TO COMPLY WITH
THE 2018 LAWS WILL EXCEED $10
BILLION STATEWIDE, INCREASING
URBAN WATER USE EFFICIENCY WILL
NOT BE ABLE TO BE A SIMPLE TASK
AND WILL RELY HEAVILY ON OUR
CONSTITUENTS MAKING CHANGES
INSIDE AND OUTSIDE OF THEIR
HOMES. THE LEGISLATIVE AND
ANALYSIS OFFICE, ALSO KNOWN AS
LAO, EARLIER THIS YEAR, FOUND
THAT THE PROPOSED STATE WATER
BOARD REGULATIONS WILL BE
DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE AND ADD
SIGNIFICANT COSTS, AND COULD
DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECT LOWER
INCOME CUSTOMERS. THE PURPOSE OF
THE BILL IS TO EXTEND THE
DEADLINE IN THE 2018 LAWS TO
MATCH THE STATE WATER BOARD'S
CURRENT SCHEDULE, TO ADAPT FINAL
REGULATIONS TO REQUIRE THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES TO
UPDATE LANDSCAPE DATA IN THE
FUTURE, AND TO GIVE WATER
SUPPLIERS THE OPTION OF
REPORTING THEIR DATA ON EITHER A
CALENDAR OR FISCAL YEAR BASIS.
QUITE SIMPLY, SENATE BILL 1330
WILL PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY AND
COST SAVINGS FOR WATER SUPPLIERS
TO COMPLY WITH THE 2018 LAWS AND
THE PENDING STATE BOARD
REGULATION REGULATIONS. THE
CHANGES WILL BE FUNDAMENTAL AND
FOUNDATIONAL TO THE TO THE
SUCCESS OF THE REGULATION AND
PROVIDE WATER SUPPLIERS ABILITY
TO COLLABORATE WITH THEIR
CUSTOMERS TO ACHIEVE MEANINGFUL
WATER SAVINGS WHILE CONSIDERING
COST AFFORDABILITY. SUPPLIERS IN
GOOD FAITH AND GOOD FAITH
EFFORTS TO MEET THEIR WATER
USAGE AND THE OBJECTIVE WITH ME
TODAY TO SUPPORT, YEAH. WELL,
WITH ME TODAY IN SUPPORT AND TO
ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IS TOM
COLEMAN, GENERAL MANAGER OF THE
ROLAND WATER DISTRICT AND
DANIELLE HAYDEN, DEPUTY
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WITH THE
CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL UTILITIES
ASSOCIATION. AND THEY ARE HERE.
OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. YOU EACH HAVE TWO MINUTES
TO PROCEED AND YOU CAN GO AHEAD
WHENEVER YOU'RE READY. THANK
YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, AND MEMBERS
OF THE COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS TOM
COLEMAN, REPRESENTING ROLAND
WATER DISTRICT, BELLFLOWER,
SOMERSET MUTUAL WATER COMPANY
AND WALNUT VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT. OUR AGENCIES ARE THE
SPONSOR OF THIS BILL, BELLFLOWER
ROLLING AND WALNUT VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT ACKNOWLEDGED THE
IMPORTANCE OF CONSERVING WATER
RESOURCES AND REMAIN COMMITTED
TO THE MISSION OF MAKING
CONSERVATION A CALIFORNIA WAY OF
LIFE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO
EMPHASIZE THAT OUR THREE
AGENCIES HAVE LONG BEEN AT THE
FOREFRONT OF WATER CONSERVATION
EFFORTS, DESPITE THE CHALLENGES
POSED BY URBAN GROWTH,
INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES TO REDUCE
WATER CONSUMPTION AND PROMOTE
SUSTAINABLE WATER MANAGEMENT
PRACTICES HAVE BEEN CONSISTENTLY
IMPLEMENTED. WHILE WE APPRECIATE
THE EFFORTS OF THE STATE WATER
BOARD TO INCORPORATE FEEDBACK
FROM VARYING, VARYING CALIFORNIA
WATER AGENCIES AND ADJUST
CONSERVATION MANDATES, FURTHER
CLARITY AND FLEXIBILITY ARE
ESSENTIAL FOR EFFECTIVE
IMPLEMENTATION. SB 1330 WILL
HELP REDUCE THE COST IMPACTS. OF
THE CURRENT TIMELINE, AS
REQUIRED BY THE 218 LAWS, AND
ALLOW MORE TIME FOR REGULATORS,
RETAIL WATER SUPPLIERS AND
CONSULTANTS TO DEVELOP THESE
PROGRAMS, HOPEFULLY RESULTING IN
A BETTER PROGRAM THAT COSTS LESS
FOR ALL RATEPAYERS IN
PARTICULARLY DISADVANTAGED
COMMUNITIES. THE RECENT
ADJUSTMENTS MADE BY THE STATE
WATER BOARD DO NOT SIGNIFY AN
EASING OF MANDATES, BUT RATHER
REFLECT A THOUGHTFUL RESPONSE TO
FEEDBACK FROM VARIOUS
STAKEHOLDERS, INCLUDING WATER
AGENCIES AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
SB 1330 ADJUSTMENTS AIM TO
STRIKE A BALANCE BETWEEN
CONSERVATION GOALS AND THE
PRACTICAL REALITIES FACED BY
WATER AGENCIES AND THE
RATEPAYERS. FOR THIS REASON, WE
REQUEST AN AYE VOTE FOR SB 1330.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. DANIELLE
HAYDEN WITH THE CALIFORNIA
MUNICIPAL UTILITIES ASSOCIATION,
REPRESENTING, FOR THE PURPOSES
OF THIS BILL, OVER 60 WATER AND
WASTEWATER AGENCIES THROUGHOUT
THE STATE, CLIMATE CHANGE IS
IMPACTING CALIFORNIA'S WATER
RESOURCES IN A PROFOUND WAY. IT
IS CRITICAL TO PURSUE AN ALL OF
THE ABOVE APPROACH TO SECURE OUR
WATER FUTURE, WHICH INCLUDES
MAKING OR IMPROVING WATER USE
EFFICIENCY IN ALL SECTORS. OUR
MEMBERS ARE COMMITTED TO MAKING
CONSERVATION A CALIFORNIA WAY OF
LIFE AND IN FACT, AT THE END OF
THE PROCESS IN 2018, C MUA
SUPPORTED THE LEGISLATION THAT
HAS LED TO THE CURRENT
REGULATORY PROCESS TAKING PLACE
AT DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES
IN THE STATE WATER BOARD. WE
HAVE APPRECIATED THE WORK OF
THOSE AGENCIES TO DEVELOP THE
REGULATIONS AND THE
COLLABORATION WITH THE WATER
COMMUNITY. WHILE MEANINGFUL
PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE SINCE THE
LÀ REPORT WAS RELEASED, SB 1330
IS INTENDED TO MAKE MEANINGFUL
TECHNICAL CHANGES THAT WILL HELP
WATER SUPPLIERS TO COMPLY WITH
THE REGULATION, AND FOR THOSE
REASONS, WE URGE AN AYE VOTE.
THANK YOU, DO WE HAVE ANOTHER
WITNESSES IN THE ROOM IN SUPPORT
OF THE BILL? IF YOU COULD LIMIT
YOUR TESTIMONY TO YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE. THANK YOU. CHRISTY FOY
HERE ON BEHALF OF THE THREE
VALLEYS MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
AND STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, JULIA HALL WITH
THE ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA
WATER AGENCIES AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, MR.
CHAIR, AND MEMBERS. STEPHANIE
MORRELL, ON BEHALF OF THE
CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF MUTUAL
WATER COMPANIES AND SUPPORT.
THANK YOU, RAQUEL AYALA WITH
REEB GOVERNMENT RELATIONS ON
BEHALF OF EL DORADO IRRIGATION
DISTRICT AND DESERT WATER AGENCY
IN STRONG SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR BETSY
MONTIEL WITH THE LEAGUE OF
CALIFORNIA CITIES IN STRONG
SUPPORT OF THE BILL. THANK YOU.
AND GOOD MORNING, JAMIE MINER,
ON BEHALF OF EASTERN MUNICIPAL
WATER DISTRICT AND SANTA
MARGARITA WATER DISTRICT.
PLEASED TO SUPPORT. THANK YOU.
APPRECIATE IT, SEEING NO OTHER
SUPPORT WITNESSES, DO WE HAVE
ANY LEAD OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN
THE ROOM? SEEING NONE. DO WE
HAVE ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES? Þ
ALITO, LEAD WITNESS OR Þ SEEING
ANY? NO LEAD WITNESSES, ANY
OTHER OPPOSITION WITNESSES? IF
YOU WANT TO LIMIT YOUR,
TESTIMONY, YOUR NAME,
AFFILIATION AND POSITION ON THE
MEASURE. YEAH. DENNIS O'CONNOR
WITH THE MONO LAKE COMMITTEE,
WITH THE ADOPTION OF THE
COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS, WE ARE NOW
GOING TO MOVE TO NEUTRAL. THANK
YOU. CODY PHILLIPS WITH
CALIFORNIA COASTKEEPER ALLIANCE
WITH THE COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS
MOVING TO NEUTRAL. THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER OPPOSITION OR MOVE
NEUTRAL WITNESSES SEEING NONE.
LET'S BRING IT BACK TO THE
COMMITTEE. SENATOR LAIRD, I
WOULD JUST, LET THE SENATOR KNOW
THAT YOU'RE THE THIRD BILL ON
EXACTLY THE SAME SUBJECT AND
THAT THE FIRST BILL WE HAD AN
ANIMATED DISCUSSION AND THE
LEGISLATIVE ANALYST WAS HERE, OR
A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OFFICE
TO COMMENT ON THE REPORT. AND I
THINK WE WOULD ALL STIPULATE OUR
OUR PRIOR COMMENTS. CGRTS. AND
YOU TAKING THE AMENDMENTS IS
WHAT MAKES THE DIFFERENCE. AND
SO I WOULD MOVE THE BILL AS
AMENDED. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A
MOTION FROM SENATOR LAIRD. ANY
OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM
THE DICE? ALL RIGHT, YEAH. AS
THE SENATOR NOTED, THIS IS THE
THIRD OF THREE BILLS. APPRECIATE
YOU TAKING THE AMENDMENTS. AND,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE? YES, I
WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE BY SAYING I
BEGAN BY SAYING, WE'VE TAKEN ALL
THE AMENDMENTS AND THIS IS THE
WAY TO GET UP ON TOP OF THE
THREE. AND I RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR AYE VOTE. THANK YOU, WE
HAVE A MOTION FROM SENATOR
LAIRD. THE MOTION IS TO PASS, AS
AMENDED, TO APPROPRIATIONS
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
SENATOR MINT, I MEAN, I SEE ALAN
DALLI. DALLI I EGGMAN. EGGMAN I.
GROVE. GROVE I HURTADO. HURTADO
I LAIRD. LAIRD I LEMON. MENGIBAR
PADILLA. OKAY. THE VOTE COUNT
RIGHT NOW IS SIX ZERO. WE'LL
LEAVE THAT BILL OPEN ON CALL.
AND I JUST WANT TO ANNOUNCE TO
ANY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
NOT HERE. WE'RE ABOUT TO START
ON OUR LAST BILL. A BIG THEME OF
TODAY HAS BEEN EFFICIENCY. LET'S
TRY TO BE EFFICIENT AND COME
DOWN HERE TO VOTE SO WE CAN GET
OUT OF HERE SOON. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. SENATOR
ARCHULETA. AND WITH THAT, WE'LL
PROCEED TO OUR LAST BILL. FILE
ITEM NUMBER SEVEN, SB 1373 BY
SENATOR CORTEZ, SENATOR, YOU CAN
PROCEED WHENEVER YOU ARE READY.
ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.
AND COLLEAGUES, I APPRECIATE
YOU. ALLOW ME TO PRESENT SB 1373
TO YOU TODAY, THE BILL WOULD
REQUIRE THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
RESOURCES TO CREATE A DASHBOARD
THAT PROVIDES VISUALIZATIONS,
ESSENTIALLY, OF WATER MOVEMENT
DATA. THE DASHBOARD WOULD BE
SPECIFIC TO THE STATE WATER
PROJECT IN THE CENTRAL VALLEY
WATER PROJECT, AND IN OTHER
WORDS, MERGING THE TWO TOGETHER.
IN 2016, THE OPEN AND
TRANSPARENT WATER DATA ACT SET
THE STAGE FOR WATER DATA
ACCESSIBLE K¾T. IT HAS RESULTED
IN THE CREATION OF A SEARCHABLE
PORTAL WHERE ANYONE CAN FIND
DATA ABOUT WATER, SUCH AS
RESERVOIR LEVELS, GROUNDWATER
LEVELS, WATER QUALITY, STREAM
FLOWS, ETC. THOUGH IT'S NOW
EASIER TO FIND THE DATA, IT
ISN'T ALWAYS EASIER FOR A
NON-EXPERT TO FIND IT OR
UNDERSTAND IT. PROJECTS LIKE THE
STATE WATER PROJECT AND CENTRAL
VALLEY PROJECT MOVE SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNTS OF WATER. AS WE KNOW
THROUGH THE STATE AND IMPACT
MOST CALIFORNIANS, THESE
PROJECTS HAVE TREMENDOUS VALUE
TO THE STATE. YET INFORMATION
ABOUT THE MOVEMENT OF WATER
THROUGH THEM CAN STILL BE OPAQUE
TO MOST OF THE PEOPLE IMPACTED
BY THEM, MEANING THE GENERAL
PUBLIC. SB 1373 AIMS TO MAKE
THIS INFORMATION EASIER FOR THE
PUBLIC TO ACCESS AND UNDERSTAND.
DWR ALREADY INTEGRATES DATA SETS
ABOUT THE STATE WATER PROJECT
AND CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT. THIS
BILL TAKES THAT WORK A STEP
FURTHER BY REQUIRING THEM TO
DISPLAY THAT DATA IN A USER
FRIENDLY, PUBLIC FACING, VISUAL
WAY. SB 1373 ALSO REQUIRES THE
DATA TO BE MERGED, NOT JUST
INTEGRATED, AND I JUST WANTED TO
DRAW THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN
THOSE TERMS THAT I'M USING. THE
STATE WATER PROJECT IS RUN BY
THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES, WHILE THE
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT IS, OF
COURSE, RUN BY THE FEDERAL
BUREAU OF RECLAMATION. EXISTING
VISUAL REPRESENTATIONS OF DATA
ABOUT THESE SYSTEMS TEND TO BE
SEPARATE. THE BILL WOULD REQUIRE
DWR TO MERGE THEM AND CREATE A
SINGLE UNIFIED VISUAL
REPRESENTATION OF WATER
MOVEMENT. THROUGH THESE SYSTEMS,
THE COMMITTEE ANALYSIS RAISES
SOME QUESTIONS, SUCH AS HOW
SPECIFIC THE BILL SHOULD BE
REGARDING WHAT DATA IS INCLUDED
AND HOW MUCH DISCRETION DWR
SHOULD HAVE OVER HOW THE
DISPLAYS ARE CREATED. I
APPRECIATE THE CLOSE READ BY
COMMITTEE STAFF AND THE WORK
THAT THIS COMMITTEE HAS DONE. I
PLAN TO CONTINUE THE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE
APPROPRIATE STAKEHOLDERS AND
WORK TO FURTHER CLARIFY, WHAT
THE DASHBOARD SHOULD INCLUDE OR
EXCLUDE. SHOULD THAT BE THE
CASE? BUT AGAIN, THE BASIC IDEA
IS TO TAKE THE INTEGRATED DATA
AND MOVE IT INTO A PUBLIC FACING
DASHBOARD. THE CURRENT
INTEGRATED DATA. MY GOAL WITH
THIS LEGISLATION IS TO ENSURE
THAT ANYONE, EVEN NON-EXPERT,
CAN UNDERSTAND WHERE WHERE WATER
IS GOING IN COMING FROM. IN
CALIFORNIA, SB 1373 IS SUPPORTED
BY THE LOS ANGELES CLIMATE
REALITY PROJECT. I RESPECTFULLY
ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT. THANK YOU,
SENATOR CORTEZ. DO YOU HAVE ANY
WITNESSES? NONE NONE. OKAY, I
GUESS WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S ANY
WITNESSES IN THE ROOM WHO WOULD
LIKE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THIS
BILL, SEEING NONE. DO WE HAVE
ANY OPPOSITION WITNESSES IN THE
ROOM? SEEING NONE. WE'LL BRING
IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. SENATOR
LAIRD, I WOULD MOVE THE BILL.
MOVE THE BILL. OKAY. MOTION FROM
SENATOR LAIRD, WE HAVE SENATOR
EGGMAN AND SENATOR DALI, THANK
YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING
THIS BILL FORWARD TODAY. I'LL BE
BRIEF. WE'RE ALL GETTING READY
TO GET OUT OF HERE, BUT I JUST
THINK WE NEED TO KEEP FINDING
MORE AND MORE WAYS TO MAKE SURE
THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHAT WE'RE
DOING. AS I WAS DRIVING IN TODAY
AND THINKING ABOUT SOMETHING Þ
LIKE, PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT
WE'RE DOING THIS. AND I THINK,
WELL, HOW DO THEY KNOW? AND I
THINK, OH, WE PUT IT ON A
DASHBOARD. AND I THINK HOW MANY
PEOPLE LOOK AT A DASHBOARD? AND
I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M GLAD WE'RE
TRYING TO DO THIS. BUT I JUST
THINK DURING YOUR TIME,
HOPEFULLY IN THE LEGISLATURE,
YOU'LL BE ABLE TO WORK ON THESE
THINGS, LIKE HOW DO WE GET MORE
GOOD INFORMATION OUT TO THE
PUBLIC TO REALLY INVOLVE THEM
WITH INFORMATION AND INSIGHT
INTO WHAT WE'RE DOING? THANK
YOU. I APPRECIATE THE
ENCOURAGEMENT. THANK YOU,
SENATOR DALI. WELL, I JUST WANT
TO ASK BECAUSE THIS BILL IS, I
THINK, THE CANADIAN COMMITTEE
ANALYSIS DID BRING UP SOME SOME
POINTS THAT ARE WE REDUNDANT
HERE. SO I WANT TO SO WE HAD
1755 BY DODD, WHICH WAS A 39
ZERO VOTE FOR TRANSPARENCY, A
COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. SO AND I
LISTENED TO YOUR TESTIMONY ABOUT
HOW, YOU KNOW, SO MORE, MORE
PEOPLE CAN GET INVOLVED. BUT AT
THE END OF THE DAY, I MEAN, IT'S
THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION OUT
THERE AND I JUST DON'T WANT TO
BE REDUNDANT. AND THE SECOND
THING, I DON'T WANT IT TO HAVE
TO BE AT SOME POINT, THE STATE
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD OR
WHOEVER IS SUPPOSED TO DO THIS
COMES AND SAYS, HEY, WE NEED YOU
TO NOW PUT MORE DATA IN BECAUSE
WE PASSED A SIGMA, WE DID ALL
KINDS OF DIVERSION REQUIREMENTS
FOR WATER RIGHT HOLDERS TO IN
REAL TIME, TRY TO QUANTIFY WHEN
THEY WERE DIVERTING, WHEN THEY
WERE DOING. AND IT WAS IT WAS A
REAL HASSLE. SO I'M ACTUALLY
THINKING ABOUT LAYING OFF THE
BILL BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW MORE
DETAIL ABOUT WHO'S GOING TO PAY
FOR IT AND WHO'S REQUIRED TO PUT
THE DATA UP THERE. THAT'S REALLY
I THINK WE HAVE 1755, WHICH IN
MY MIND WAS TO DO THE EXACT SAME
THING. SO COULD YOU ANSWER,
WHO'S GOING TO PAY AND WHO'S
GOING TO WHAT DATA OR WATER?
RIGHT. DIVERTERS AND OR IS THIS
OR IS THIS JUST THE STATE WATER
RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD OR THE
CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT SAYING,
HEY, THE FLOWS AT CHAU, I MEAN,
YOU CAN GO ONLINE AND FIND THE
FLOWS AT SHASTA RIGHT NOW AND
INFLOWS AND OUTFLOWS OF WHICH IS
A HUGE WATERSHED. THANK YOU. OR
THE OR YOU CAN DO IT ON ON
OROVILLE AND FOLSOM. AND SO YEAH
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SENATOR
THROUGH THE CHAIR I'LL RESPOND.
MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THINGS
ARE WORKING CURRENTLY IS IN THE
EIGHT YEARS THAT'S PASSED SINCE
THAT 2016 LEGISLATION, DWR HAS
DONE A LOT OF WORK TO INTEGRATE
THE FEDERAL PROJECT, THE STATE
PROJECT INFORMATION PRIOR. MY
UNDERSTANDING IS PRIOR TO THEN
YOU LITERALLY HAD TO USE A PAPER
AND A PENCIL AND A CALCULATOR OR
SOMETHING. IF YOU WANTED TO SEE
THE TOTAL, THE SUM TOTAL OF THAT
INFORMATION, THAT DATA, DO THE
MATH ON IT, SOME WATER DISTRICTS
ARE STILL OPERATING THAT WAY, AT
LEAST BY THEIR OWN, YOU KNOW,
SORT OF TESTIMONY TO ME, IF YOU
WILL, IN MY TOURS, INTERACTIONS
WITH GRASSLANDS AND WETLANDS,
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE CENTRAL
VALLEY AND ASKING THEM THAT
QUESTION, ARE YOU ABLE TO SEE
QUICKLY OR CAN YOU POINT ME TO
JUST THE TOTAL SORT OF THAT
THIRD COLUMN, IF YOU THINK OF IT
ON A SPREADSHEET WHERE
EVERYTHING'S TOTALED UP AS TO
WHAT'S MOVING RIGHT NOW, REAL
TIME. AND THEY SAID, WE, WE
STILL DO THAT MANUALLY. WE HAVE
TO DO THAT MANUALLY BECAUSE THE
TWO PLATFORMS TO US ARE STILL
SEPARATE. THE FEDERAL AND THE
STATE. SO THE BILL WAS JUST NOT
TRYING TO TAKE ANY DEEPER DIVE
THAN TO JUST SAY, LET'S TAKE
THAT INTEGRATED DATA AND MAKE IT
SO THAT THE SAME PERSON IN THE
PUBLIC WHO MIGHT WANT TO, YOU
KNOW, TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT ISIS
TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON. COULD
TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THIS AT
THIS DASHBOARD AND SEE WHAT'S
GOING ON. IT'S REALLY JUST MEANT
TO MAKE A WHOLE BUNCH OF DATA
THAT'S NOW BEEN INTEGRATED
TOGETHER TO TAKE THAT NEXT STEP
AND MAKE IT, PUBLICLY AVAILABLE.
IN TERMS OF ORDINARY NEIGHBORS
OUT THERE, AVERAGE PEOPLE WHO
DON'T KNOW RIGHT WHERE TO LOOK
LIKE YOU AND I MIGHT. AND I'VE
DONE THE SAME THING. AND THE
WATER AGENCIES ARE THE ONES THAT
ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT THAT
UP. SO WE, WE, WE, WE FORCED
THEM TO PUT THE DATA IN REAL
TIME IF THEY'RE DIVERTING OR
USING OUR WATER RIGHTS. SO
THAT'S EVERYBODY, BECAUSE YOU
HAVE TO YOU CAN'T DO ANY OF
THOSE THINGS UNLESS YOU HAVE A
WATER. RIGHT. SO ANYWAY, I
APPRECIATE IT. I'M GOING TO LAY
OFF AND DIG IN A LITTLE MORE AND
TRY TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, HOW
IT'S GOING TO IMPACT SOME OF
THOSE DISTRICTS THAT, OR JUST IF
WE'RE REDUNDANT HERE. SO I
APPRECIATE YOU. I APPRECIATE THE
COMMENTS, ANY OTHER COMMENTS
FROM THE DAIS? THAT I'LL JUST
WE'LL POINT OUT THAT I THINK
THAT, I APPRECIATE, AS SENATOR
EGGMAN SAID, THAT THE NEED AND
THE DESIRE TO HAVE MORE
ACCESSIBLE DATA, ORDINARILY, I'D
SAY THAT A BILL LIKE THIS MAY
NOT BE NECESSARY BECAUSE DWR HAS
THE AUTHORITY. BUT I UNDERSTAND
THAT, DWR HAS BEEN A LITTLE
RESISTANT TO SOME OF THE EFFORTS
THAT ARE CONTAINED IN THIS BILL.
SO, WITH THAT, I WILL VOTE AYE
ON THIS BILL. AND THE
RECOMMENDATION IS AND I. AND
WOULD YOU LIKE TO CLOSE, SENATOR
CORTEZ AGAIN? THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR, AND APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS JUST NOW. CERTAINLY
APPRECIATE SENATOR EGGMAN'S
COMMENTS TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP
WORKING IN THIS AREA. I THINK WE
HAVE MORE WORK TO DO JUST ON THE
BILL ITSELF RIGHT NOW, TO DEFINE
IT A LITTLE BIT MORE. SO IT WAS,
YOU KNOW, LIKE WALKING A LITTLE
BIT INTO AN ABYSS AT FIRST TO
TRY TO JUST FIGURE OUT WHAT
EXACTLY IS OUT THERE AND NOW I
THINK WE HAVE A GOOD HANDLE ON
THAT, I WILL REPRESENT TO THE
COMMITTEE AND TO THE INDIVIDUAL
MEMBERS THAT WE WILL MAKE SURE
THERE'S NO REDUNDANCY AND
TIGHTEN UP, THE AREAS THAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT HERE IN TERMS OF DATA
AT AS THE, AS THE COMMITTEE HAS
BASICALLY RECOMMENDED. AND WITH
THAT, I WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK
FOR YOUR. AYE VOTE. THANK YOU.
SENATOR CORTEZ, WE HAVE A MOTION
ON THE BILL I'M TRYING TO
REMEMBER, FROM SENATOR LAIRD.
OKAY, THE MOTION IS Dð PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR MIN A MIN
. AYE. SALADO. SALADO. AYE.
ALLEN ALLEN. AYE. DALI EGGMAN.
EGGMAN. AYE GROVE. GROVE. AYE.
HURTADO HURTADO. AYE. LAIRD.
LAIRD AYE. LIMÓN. MENGIBAR
MENGIBAR. AYE. PADILLA. ALL
GOOD. OKAY. THANKS. THAT VOTE IS
EIGHT ZERO, WE'LL LEAVE IT ON.
CALL AND WITH THAT, WE'LL NOW GO
BACK TO THE BILLS THAT WE'VE
HEARD BEFORE, WE'LL START WITH
THE CONSENT CALENDAR, AND SO
AGAIN, WE HAVE THREE ITEMS ON
CONSENT FILE. ITEM NUMBER ONE,
SB 1088 BY ALVARADO GIL. FILE
ITEM NUMBER FIVE, SB 1218 BY
SENATOR NEWMAN. AND FILE ITEM
NUMBER NINE, SB 1009 BY SENATOR
DALLI, ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. SENATOR SARDO. HI,
SARAH. AYE, ALAN. ALAN AYE.
MENGIBAR. MENGIBAR. AYE KNOW
WE'RE MISSING MEDIA ATTENTION,
OKAY. THAT VOTE COUNT IS TEN
ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT ON CALL,
WE'LL MOVE TO FILE ITEM NUMBER
TWO. SB 1110 BY SENATOR ASHBY.
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
DID YOU SAY THE MOTION, THE
MOTION IS DUE. PASS AS AMENDED
TO APPROPRIATIONS, FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO, SENATOR SARDO, A
SIERRO CERO. AYE. ALAN. ALAN.
AYE MENGIBAR. MENGIBAR. AYE
PADILLA. OKAY AS TEN ZERO, THAT
VOTE COUNT IS TEN ZERO. WE'LL
LEAVE IT OPEN ON CALL. WE'LL
MOVE ON TO FILE NUMBER THREE BY
SENATOR DODD AS SB 1159. THE
MOTION IS Dð PASS AS AMENDED.
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. AND CHAIR IS
VOTING AYE ON THAT. SENATOR
CIARDO SERRANO. AYE. ALAN. ALAN
AYE. MENGIBAR. MENGIBAR. AYE.
PADILLA OKAY. THAT VOTE COUNT IS
TEN ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN ON
CALL, NEXT ITEM IS SB 1185, FILE
ITEM NUMBER FOUR BY SENATOR
NILO, THE MOTION IS DUE PASSED.
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL, CHAIR VOTING NO
ON THAT CURRENT VOTE. CHAIR
VOTING NO. SENATOR SARDO. SARDO
AYE. ALAN. NO. ALAN. NO HURTADO.
AYE. TO. NO MENGIBAR. NO.
MENGIBAR. NO PADILLA. OKAY. NO.
ONE. TWO. THREE. NO. THREE.
SEVEN. ON THAT VOTE COUNT IS
THREE SEVEN. WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN
ON CALL, NEXT ITEM IS FILE ITEM
NUMBER SIX BY SENATOR ARCHULETA.
SB 1330, THE MOTION IS Dð PASS
AS AMENDED. APPROPRIATION
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
AND CHAIR VOTING. AYE SENATOR.
SARDO. SARDO. AYE. ALAN AYE.
ALAN. AYE. LIMÓN MENGIBAR.
MENGIBAR LA AYE. PADILLA OKAY.
NO 990. THAT VOTE COUNT IS NINE
ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN ON
CALL, I THINK WE JUST DID,
SENATOR CORTEZ. SO WE'LL MOVE ON
TO FILE ITEM EIGHT, SB 1390 BY
SENATOR CABALLERO. THE MOTION IS
Dð PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. CHAIR IS VOTING
AYE. SENATOR SARDO. SARDO. AYE.
ALAN. ALAN AYE. MENGIBAR.
MENGIBAR. AYE. PADILLA THAT'S
TEN ZERO. THAT VOTE COUNT IS TEN
ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN ON
CALL. WE'LL MOVE ON TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER TEN. SB 1448 BY SENATOR
HURTADO, ASSISTANT. THE MOTION
IS Dð. PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS.
SENATE, ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. CHAIR IS VOTING AYE.
SENATOR CIARDO. SENATOR ALLEN.
ALLEN AYE. EGGMAN. EGGMAN. AYE.
MENGIBAR MENGIBAR. AYE. PADILLA
ALL RIGHT, SO. THAT VOTE COUNT
IS NINE ZERO. WE'LL LEAVE IT
OPEN ON CALL, AND THEN WE'LL
MOVE ON TO FILE ITEM NUMBER
NUMBER 11, SB 1402 BY SENATOR
MINH, THE MOTION IS TO PASS TO
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT. PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. RIGHT. CHAIR
VOTING AYE ON HIS BILL. SENATOR
SALADO. SALADO. NØ. ALLEN ALLEN.
AYE. MENGIBAR MENGIBAR. AYE.
PADILLA OKAY, SO. THAT VOTE
COUNT IS EIGHT TWO. WE'LL LEAVE
IT OPEN ON CALL. I'M SORRY.
EIGHT THREE. WE'LL LEAVE.
737373. I'M SORRY. THAT VOTE
COUNT IS SEVEN THREE. WE'LL
LEAVE IT OPEN ON CALL, WE'LL
MOVE BACK TO THE ITEMS. I THINK
SENATOR LIMÓN IS IN THE ROOM, SO
WE'LL. KNOW I THINK THERE'S A
COUPLE OTHER SECONDS. YEAH LET'S
SEE. YEAH. WHICH ONE? OKAY. SO,
OKAY, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO FILE
ITEM NUMBER SIX, SB 1330 BY
SENATOR ARCHULETA. THE MOTION IS
Dð PASS AS AMENDED TO
APPROPRIATIONS ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL CHAIR IS VOTING
AYE AND VICE CHAIR VOTING AYE.
SENATOR LIMÓN. AYE. SENATOR
LIMÓN. AYE OKAY. 1010 ZERO ONE
THAT, VOTE COUNT IS TEN ZERO.
WE'LL LEAVE IT OPEN ON CALL, AND
THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO SB 1373,
FILE ITEM NUMBER SEVEN BY
SENATOR CORTEZ. ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. THE MOTION
IS TO PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS
WITH BOTH CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR
VOTING. AYE. SENATOR LIMÓN. AYE.
LIMÓN. AYE OKAY. IT'S FIVE ZERO.
THAT VOTE COUNT IS NINE ZERO.
OKAY. WE'RE WAITING ON SENATOR
PADILLA. WE'LL GIVE HIM A FEW
MINUTES, AND SO WE'LL TAKE A
RECESS UNTIL HE GETS HERE. THANK
YOU. OKAY.
ALL RIGHT, WE WILL RESUME THE
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMITTEE, NATURAL RESOURCES AND
WATER COMMITTEE IS, BACK IN
SESSION OR WHATEVER THE RIGHT
TERMINOLOGY IS HERE, AND SO
WE'LL GO BACK OVER OUR VOTES
HERE. ASSISTANT, WE'LL START
WITH THE CONSENT CALENDAR, THAT
IS FILE ITEM NUMBER ONE, SB 1088
BY ALVARADO GIL, FILE NUMBER
FIVE, SB 1218 BY SENATOR NEWMAN.
AND FILE ITEM NUMBER NINE, SB
1009 BY SENATOR DALI, ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. SENATOR
PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE 11 ZERO 11
ZERO. THE CONSENT CALENDAR IS
OUT. WE'LL MOVE TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER TWO, SB 1110 BY SENATOR
ASHBY. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS, AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS.
CHAIR. VOTING AYE. ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL AND THE
CURRENT VOTE IS TEN ZERO. CHAIR
AND VICE CHAIR. VOTING AYE.
SENATOR PADILLA, THIS IS FOR SB
111110. FILE ITEM NUMBER TWO.
SURE WHAT'S THE DISPOSITION ON
AMENDMENTS OF THIS BILL, SHE
TOOK THE AMENDMENTS AND THE
CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR BOTH VOTED
AYE, I VOTE I OKAY. SENATOR
PADILLA, I THAT'S 11 ZERO. THAT
BILL IS 11 ZERO. THE BILL IS
OUT, WE'LL MOVE TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER THREE, SB 1159 BY SENATOR
DODD. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS, AS
AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS,
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
CURRENT VOTE IS TEN ZERO, WITH
BOTH CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR VOTING
AYE. SENATOR PADILLA. PADILLA.
AYE THAT VOTE IS 11 ZERO. THE
BILL IS OUT. WE'LL MOVE TO FILE
ITEM NUMBER FOUR, SB 1185 BY
SENATOR NILO, THE MOTION IS DUE.
PAST APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR HAS
VOTED NO. ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL
THE ROLL. CURRENT VOTE IS 3 TO 7
WITH CHAIR VOTING NO. VICE CHAIR
VOTING AYE. SENATOR PADILLA. NO.
PADILLA. NO 47, THAT VOTE. FINAL
VOTE COUNT IS 4 TO 7. THE BILL
FAILS. I'M SORRY. 3 TO 7. OH,
I'M SORRY, 3 TO 7. I DID THE
WRONG. 8 OR 3 IS 3 TO 8. I'M
SORRY THAT THAT VOTE IS 3 TO 8.
THE BILL FAILS. THANK YOU, NEXT
ITEM IS FIVE. ITEM NUMBER SIX BY
SENATOR ARCHULETA, SB 1330. THE
MOTION IS Dð PASS AS AMENDED.
THE APPROPRIATIONS CHAIR VOTING
AYE. ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. CURRENT VOTE IS TEN ZERO.
SENATOR PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE
THAT VOTE IS 11 ZERO. THE BILL
IS OUT. WE'LL MOVE TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER SEVEN, SB 1373 BY SENATOR
CORTEZ. THE MOTION IS DUE PASSED
TO APPROPRIATIONS. CHAIR. VOTING
AYE. ASSISTANT PLEASE CALL THE
ROLL. CURRENT VOTE IS NINE ZERO.
SENATOR PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE
THAT VOTE IS TEN ZERO. THE BILL
IS OUT, WE'LL MOVE TO FILE ITEM
NUMBER EIGHT, SB 1390 BY SENATOR
CABALLERO. THE MOTION IS Dð PASS
AS AMENDED TO APPROPRIATIONS
WITH CHAIR VOTING AYE.
ASSISTANT, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
CURRENT VOTE IS TEN ZERO.
SENATOR PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE.
THAT VOTE COUNT IS 11 ZERO. THE
BILL IS OUT. WE'LL MOVE TO FILE
ITEM NUMBER TEN, SB 1448 BY
SENATOR HURTADO. THE MOTION IS
Dð. PASS TO APPROPRIATIONS WITH
CHAIR VOTING AYE. ASSISTANT,
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. CURRENT
VOTE IS NINE ZERO. SENATOR
PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE TEN ZERO.
THE VOTE COUNT IS 11 ZERO. THE
BILL IS OUT. I'M SORRY. TEN. THE
VOTE IS TEN ZERO. THE BILL IS
OUT, FINALLY, WE'LL MOVE TO SB
1402, FILE ITEM NUMBER 11 BY
SENATOR MINH. THE MOTION IS Dð
PASSED APPROPRIATIONS WITH CHAIR
VOTING AYE. ASSISTANT, PLEASE
CALL THE ROLL. CURRENT VOTE IS 7
TO 3 WITH CHAIR VOTING AYE AND
VICE CHAIR VOTING NO. SEN.
PADILLA. PADILLA. AYE. THAT
FINAL VOTE IS 8 TO 3. THE BILL
IS OUT. AND WITH THAT, I WANT TO
THANK EVERYONE FOR YOUR PATIENCE
AND COOPERATION. FOR THOSE
WATCHING, YOU ARE ENCOURAGED TO
SUBMIT ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS
TO THE COMMITTEE. BUT WITH THAT,
WE'VE CONCLUDED THE AGENDA AND
SENATE NATURAL RESOURCES AND
WATER COMMITTEE IS ADJOURNED